Write descriptive essay about The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King movie 2003, write an essay of at least 500 words on The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, 5 paragraph essay on The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, definition essay, descriptive essay, dichotomy essay.
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
Year:
2003
Country:
USA, New Zealand, Germany
Genre:
Drama, Action, Adventure, Fantasy
IMDB rating:
8.9
Director:
Peter Jackson
Noel Appleby as Everard Proudfoot
Sean Astin as Sam
David Aston as Gondorian Soldier 3
John Bach as Madril
Sean Bean as Boromir
Cate Blanchett as Galadriel
Orlando Bloom as Legolas
Billy Boyd as Pippin
Sadwyn Brophy as Eldarion
Marton Csokas as Celeborn
Richard Edge as Gondorian Soldier 1
Jason Fitch as Uruk 2
Storyline: While Frodo & Sam continue to approach Mount Doom to destroy the One Ring, unaware of the path Gollum is leading them, the former Fellowship aid Rohan & Gondor in a great battle in the Pelennor Fields, Minas Tirith and the Black Gates as Sauron wages his last war against Middle-Earth.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x1080 px 19109 Mb mpeg4 10151 Kbps mp4 Download
HQ DVD-rip 640x272 px 2090 Mb mpeg4 696 Kbps avi Download
Reviews
Minor flaws aside, LOTR proves itself one of the most successful trilogies in modern film
In Return of the King - which follows the book (that I have not read, though heard what is in it that is not in the film) as close if not closer than the past two - co-writer/co-producer/director Peter Jackson brings Tolkien's grand tale of the quest to destroy the ring to an end. The story strands follow along the similar linear paths of the others, and it is done so with an equal worth in entertainment. Frodo, Sam and Gollum's path to Mordor unfolds as almost something of a love triangle for the ring; Merry and Pippen follow their own tales towards the great battle; Gandalf, Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli, and all the dwellers of middle earth prepare for the swarm of the terrors of Sauron.

There is much praise that should be given to Jackson and his crew/cast on not just the worth of Return of the King, but to what is now the entire saga of the Lord of the Rings as a whole. Though the film does carry quite a load to it (at three hours and twenty-one minutes it's the longest of the three in theatrical form, and it definitely does go on at least ten to fifteen minutes longer than it should), and expands and deflates on the details of some characters (i.e. Saruman is nowhere in sight in this version, while Arwen gets more than what is from the original work), there are plenty of rousing scenes and sequences, terrific battles, and a grasp on the visual effects as a whole that don't let up. In all, ROTK is on the level with Fellowship and Two Towers, making the parts as good as the whole. This is something that only several other filmmakers can make a claim to, that one film does not bring on a let down from the expectations that preceded it. It's the kind of film I'll want to see again, however it would be very difficult to sit through it in one place. Grade: A (both as a picture in and of itself, and overall on the three epics combined)
2003-12-18
One Film To Rule Them All
Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is no doubt the best movie I've seen. The film captures you instantly up to the words "The End" appearing on the screen. The Return of the King is nothing short of excitement.

For all those who doesn't know what The Lord of the Rings is about (I'm thinking everybody does either through the books or the movies), here's a brief summary: Just over 50 year ago, J.R.R. Tolkien published a tale about a long, dangerous quest to destroy 1 ring. This tale is split into 3 novels, "The Fellowship of the Rings", "The Two Towers" and "The Return of the King". This tale, is called "The Lord of the Rings". Nearly 50 years after the novels were published, Peter Jackson tells the tale in another way, by bringing it to life onto the big screen.

This tale is about 9 people's quest to destroy one magic ring and return peace to Middle-Earth. If this one ring goes back to it's maker, the evil Sauron, the world will be under his control, bringing death and misery everywhere. The only way to destroy this powerful ring is to cast it into the fires of Mount Doom, where it was made. Only one hobbit could resist the temptation to keep the ring and this job was given to a hobbit named Frodo Baggins. To help him along the way, a fellowship of nine people were brought together. In it was a wizard, 2 men, an elf, a dwarf and three other hobbits. Together, they set out for Mordor, where Mount Doom is situated. Getting to Mordor is not as easy as it sounds. On the way they'll have to battle Orcs, Uruk-hais, giant spiders and other results of Tolkien's fascinating imagination.

The Return of the King is the last addition to this vast trilogy. Peter Jackson does a great job in interpreting Tolkien's thoughts and feelings into a film. Watching the movies is just like reading the books themselves. If it was only the movies, it wouldn't have made such an impact on the public. The music in all three films practically takes you on your very own journey and the acting from the actors was also very impressive. If anything was missing from these movies, they just wouldn't have been such a success. Peter Jackson has done this to perfection.

Overall, this is a must-watch movie. Plenty of action and special effects, not to mention a very heart warming ending to the trilogy. I'll just say one more thing, don't criticise anything until you have saw, heard or done it, especially Lord of the Rings.
2006-12-08
The great film saga of our time.
The Lord of the Rings is without doubt the most epic and staggering film undertaking of all time. How Peter Jackson pulled it off I will never know, maybe he used one of Gandalf's enchantments! Rarely throughout the 12 hour epic is there a bad scene or a dull moment, every scene has had so much thought and hard work poured into it. From the writing, to the production crew, to the acting, to the scenery,to the music (oh god I love the music)and just everybody's determination to pull this near impossible feat off, even fantasy haters would have to admit their amazement. Never has a movie given me so many spine tingly moments and scenes of such beauty that they nearly push me to tears. Peter Jackson seemed so blessed with good fortune, (Viggo Mortensens' last minute replacement says it all), it was as if the spirit of Tolkien himself was guiding it along. As I see this as one whole movie, I won't be reviewing just 'The Return of the King'.

I saw the first film 'The Fellowhip of the Ring' when I was 12, and I'm 21 now and I still haven't been more absorbed by a movie in the cinema and I doubt I ever will. The transition from the innocence and lightness of the Shire at the start to the dark epic of the quest later is nothing short of brilliant. I think 'Fellowship' is my favourite of the three, it goes through the most development and felt the most satisfying. The whole mines of Moria sequence is my standout moment of the entire trilogy. To the battle with the cave troll and the escape from the balrog, it is exhilarating, involving and most of all - emotional.

'The Two Towers' has the hardest task of being the middle film, but it more than rises to the challenge. It drops you straight into the action and doesn't hold up. The Rohan sequences are the best bits of the film, culminating in the battle of helms deep which to me is the most personal and intense battle of the trilogy. The creation of Gollum was revolutionary, through CGI and motion capture never has a computerised character seemed so real.

'The Return of the King' delivers the emotional finale we all hoped it would. I remember sitting in the cinema hearing all sorts of sobbing all around me during the climax on mount doom. There are so many stand-out moments in this movie but the one I will mention is the charge of the Rohirrim. This scene actually pushed me to tears on first viewing, not because it was sad but because it was so... awesome. I was so happy when this film won 11 Oscars, it more than deserved it, I was hoping it would win more than 11 but oh well.

Any gripes I have for the trilogy, would be the portrayal of its big bad Sauron, and considering that Sauron is the centre of 'The Lord of the Rings' this is definitely a problem. If there was one thing from the books that is unfilmable it is definitely Sauron. How do you portray a villain that hardly appears and any descriptions of him there are, are so vague and surreal? Is Sauron a big flaming eye or did he have a physical form? This is never made clear in the books and poses a big obstacle for film, where the audience needs to see their villain. Peter Jackson and co do the best they can with the material, and chose to literally portray Sauron as the big flaming eye. However this is not enough to satisfy, especially during the climax of 'Return of the King' where the dark lord is basically a lighthouse! The films make the mistake of bigging Sauron up through the films, and ultimately it fizzles out by the end which is a real shame.

As you can tell from what I have said, I love 'The Lord of the Rings', and I would say it is my favourite film of all time. No other film has moved me as much as this and given me so many different emotions from fear, to sadness to laughter. I honestly couldn't imagine anyone else playing the characters, it was if they were made for them. The actors all generally had a special relationship with one another and with Peter Jackson (just watch the extras), and that what you are watching on screen is genuine. It was almost to the point that the actors weren't working so hard out of professionalism but out of love and devotion to Mr.Jackson. Hardly any other films can claim they had this kind of magic behind the camera. Honourable mentions will be given to Ian Mckellen as Gandalf, Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn and Elijah Wood as Frodo, I felt these three literally became the characters they were playing, but of course there are countless others to mention but I don't have time. Howard Shore's score is possibly the best movie score ever, and the films would be nothing without it.

Ultimately say what you will hardcore Tolkien fans about the films, you cannot deny that they did so much for Tolkiens' greatest work and made it one of the most recognisable stories in the world. If you have somehow not seen these films, first of all slap yourself and secondly go buy the extended editions as these are the true versions of the films and include many great scenes that were cut - especially 'The Return of the King' which had many vital scenes cut aka. Saruman's last hoorah and Gandalf confronting the Witch King. Peter Jackson I salute you, and New Zealand!
2010-06-21
The Supreme Motion Picture of All Time...
The Lord of the Rings - The Return of the King is by far the most moving, inspirational and epic of the three parts in Peter Jackson's take on Tolkien's fantasy masterpiece. After proving that this trilogy can carry the weight of a truly enormous body of text with The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers, Jackson has shown that nothing is impossible anymore when being brought to film, and that fantasy can be surreal, but grounded to reality.

I saw this film at 8:00 PM, and missed school the following day -- exactly similar to The Two Towers when it was released. After seeing The Return of the King I was speechless. Never before had a film made such an impact on me as this conclusion did, and now with it completed, The Lord of the Rings is truly the best of the best.

Jackson has treated this trilogy as one film, following to Tolkien's linear time-line, and not the way the books were written, which makes this a film that flows and never loses track of pacing. The dialogue is emotional, be it the speech between Gandalf and Pippin before the gates of Minas Tirith, or inspirational, such as the rousing deliveries by Theoden and Aragorn. The vast emotion makes this a film for the ages. Following our heroes adventure since film one, we have grown compassion for each and everyone of them. Sam's devotion to Frodo is something that can inspire, and the eu-catastrophe is fully used here once again, because just as it seems that all hope has been lost, it shines through the void and victory is achieved. If one were to fear that the ending would feel like there was no closure, then have none, because The Return of the King has a 20-minute denouement that goes as far as four-years into the future, and the ending on the shores of the Grey Havens brought me to tears.

The special effects are nothing short of amazing. The blend of miniatures/bigatures and CGI is believable beyond comprehension, and the addition of New Zealand locales adds something beyond some peoples' wildest dreams. The level of detail on Minas Tirith is something no one has ever seen before, the massive armies sunder speakers as war erupts, and we see the Mumakil and the Fell Beasts in full fruition, as hinted in The Two Towers. What could've seem fatal, as cinematic history has shown before, is the introduction of Shelob the spider. The special effects team has created the most memorable spider in film history. She terrifies and drops jaws at the realism of such a beast.

The tension for the siege on Minas Tirith is so highly anticipated, that the filmmakers have completely satisfied every expectation to how epic it could've been. The scope is just extraordinary. The battle of the Pelennor Fields is so huge in the book, yet it has been fully realized in Jackson's film. The final stand at the Black Gate is so emotional involving, it's hard to think that any action could top what was previously seen, but it is done so with vision beyond imagination.

Howard Shore's music is also some of the most impressive and beautiful orchestration ever done for film. Besting its predecessors, The Return of the King's score is pure genius. From the new theme for Gondor, to the moving Into the West, Shore's composition sweeps and soars. Now that each of the three films' complete recordings have been released, I strongly urge a fan of the music to buy them, because they really are the best of the best.

The acting even surpasses the first two, having the evolution of each character add to the dramatic effect, be it the loss of a life, or the triumph over evil. Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn is like a Godsend. Sean Astin steals nearly every scene he is in as Sam, making us hope he helps Frodo get rid of the Ring of Power. Once again, Andy Serkis provides a stirring and great performance as Smeagol/Gollum. The full weight of the Ring is realized in this film, and Elijah Wood makes us see his struggle like the Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers only hinted upon.

Overall, The Lord of the Rings - The Return of the King is remarkable. The battles are amazing, never making the film drag, and always heightening the tension. From the acting to the sound editing, this film delivers in what it promises, and that is the supreme motion picture of our lifetime, and many more years to come.
2008-08-25
Perfect!
This movie and the whole trilogy deserves all the praise it has received.

I had been worried about seeing it because of how much Peter Jackson re-wrote "Two Towers" and presented scenes that undermined some of Tolkien's fundamental ideas. This time, Jackson followed Tolkien more closely and the worst that can be claimed are sins of omission. It's a real shame we didn't get to see Christopher Lee in this move; he totally rocked in the previous films. Telling us to wait for the "extended" version isn't right. Maybe Jackson should have foregone one of the too many endings in ROTK to give Lee some film time. That said, all the elements that worked in the previous movies were absolutely glorious in this film. The one new thing that I would add to so much that has already been written is that big kudos must go to the great Tolkien artists Alan Lee and John Howe whose artistry shaped so much of the imagery from the first moments of FOTR to the final scenes of ROTK. This historic trilogy would not have been the same without them. The LOTR enterprise has clearly been a great labor of love from all who worked on it over the years, and this final installment was a crowning achievement.
2012-03-28
Its Awesome
I think this movie is the best!!!! It had the best special effects I've ever seen, also the best actors who played their role really well. It also had a great background music which I totally loved. This movie really deserved all the Oscars they have won :) All the scenes in the movie made a great representation of Tolkien's stories. I definitely was captured all the landscapes in the movie, New Zealand rules! If people haven't seen it, they should because its really entertaining. By now, I've seen it like 20 times or so. The dialogue in the movie are really complex, which made me think a little, at least for me, its good. Everyone must at least see one of the 3 because they all are great.
2006-09-23
Simply too much to cover
Perhaps I had built this movie up too much in my mind before I saw it. Perhaps I'm too strict of an adherent to the book to fully appreciate this movie. But whatever the case, in the end, I feel like there is simply too much content in the third book to do a good job with on the big screen.

There are some minor spoilers below, so be warned.

They cover the majority of the important parts of the story. Seeing all of the things that were left out gave me a renewed appreciation for just how much material there was to cover; even at 3 1/2 hours, there really isn't much in the way of filler. However, cutting wasn't enough. Everything that is left in feels very superficial to me, simply because there is no time to go into any great detail with any one thing.

This is especially true of the character development. Theoden seems one-dimensional, alternating between a look of stern resolve and a gentle smile for those he likes; you never really get a true feel for his transformation from despair to redemption for himself, and the restoration of the honor of his people. Denethor simply comes across as a madman; you'd never understand the man that he is in the book from his depiction in the movie. Moreover, the cause for his despair is never explained in the movie, which only serves to reinforce the skewed depiction of his character in general. Aragorn should be stronger and more certain of his role as king in this movie than the previous two. And yet he seems weaker in this one than the others. This is exemplified in the handling of the Paths of the Dead, where he makes one of his uninspiring speeches to implore the dead to follow him into battle, rather than demanding it as their king, to fulfill their oaths.

The flow of the story also suffers, seemingly due to time constraints. First of all, the part with the palantir should have been left out entirely. It has little to no relevance in the context in which they introduce it, and serves only to make you wonder what the hell that was all about when it's never mentioned again. Seriously, does anyone who hasn't read the books have any idea what that's supposed to be about? I sincerely doubt it. Another thing is that all of the segues between scenes seem thrown together. To look at it, you would think that all that's necessary to go into battle in a neighboring land is to point your sword in the general direction and yell "charge!" First the Rohirrim ride here. Then there. Then Aragorn decides he has to leave, and just bolts. And Theoden, when questioned, says, "He has to go." And just like that, they ride off again.

And the battles? Well, they're epic, and the special effects are nice. But from a practical standpoint, the battles were pretty lame. There was nothing in the way of real strategic battle planning in the making of this movie, especially for one of the magnitude of that fought at Minas Tirith, where you have multiple armies coming together to fight each other. I find the battles to be rather incoherent and uninspiring. In addition, the oliphaunts inspire more terror than the winged nazgul? That's basically the way the movie lays it out.

Finally, things start to spiral way too quickly after the battle at Minas Tirith. The final battle is, what, five minutes later? Also, with Sam and Frodo, you see them coming down from the gate one minute, and the next minute they're at Mount Doom. It's hard to understand their complete exhaustion and inability to go on when it looks like their trip through Mordor happened in the five minutes between the two battles. Of course, there's a lot of material not covered in the movie in that time, but then that's my whole point.

I applaud the efforts made in the making of this movie, and the trilogy in general. It was no small undertaking, and I respect the attempt that was made (in contrast to the contempt and disgust I hold for the Ralph Bakshi version). But now that I've seen them all, I can't help but think this series would have been better served as a multi-part television series of some sort, where you could take more time to get to know the characters, to understand the history, and get a full idea of the magnitude of the events taking place. I think that, even with 3+ hour-long movies, there just isn't enough time to get it right. 6 out of 10 stars from me.
2004-01-02
My objective and unhyped view? Stunning. Simply stunning.
Frodo and Sam continue their quest to destroy the ring, led by the untrustworthy Gollum. Meanwhile the rest of the Fellowship prepare for another battle to hold a human city against an onslaught of orcs.

If you check my other reviews you will note that I wasn't a massive fan of the first two films - I loved them, but was not blind to their faults. However, let me just lay my cards out here, I was totally blown away by this film. For the vast majority (and more of that later) the narrative flowed really well where the other two films had struggled to really keep consistent. Here the various strands work well together and, while characters have only brief times to tell stories, on the whole it manages it well. I got the feeling that the film really let rip - it knew this was the ending and it did feel that everything came together in a collection of noise and energy which really made it feel like the final part of a trilogy rather than just a stand alone film.

The one area where the film really stutters (and actually caused people to leave the cinema in annoying numbers) is ironically the place where Jackson is true to the book, and that's the final 20 minutes. There is a clear scene where the film ends, however it then runs for another 20 minutes - which is a mix of scenes that all fade out like they were the end. To Joe Public (ie me!) I would have been happy not to have all the loose ends tied up in the way the book does it - the film should have ended on a high (with the King being crowned etc) but instead it seems to crawl to an end in a way that is not in line with the momentum of the film (if not the whole trilogy!) This problem is minor on the grand scheme of things, but I would rather have left the cinema on my high than be made to wonder `when's this ending? Is this the end now? Oh, maybe this is it now?' - but I do understand why it was done this way.

The cast, as they have been all the way, are excellent. Wood's Frodo changes well during this film while Astin is touching in his portrayal of unerring friendship. Bloom and Rhys-Davis had less to do but came into their own during the battle scenes - adding both action and the odd comic touch (`that still counts as one' being accepted by the audience as a chance to break the tension). Mortensen is the title character and serves it well, with McKellen also continuing his strong role. I could list through the whole cast but I will stick with noting two things. Firstly, both Monaghan and Boyd had bigger and more meaningful roles and rose to them well. Secondly I continue with my belief from the second film that Serkis is the stand out actor of the trilogy. His Gollum is so much more than an effect - he is tragic, fearsome, hateful and funny. Praise of course goes to the special effects for making this character tell so much with an expression but to pretend that the work of the actor is secondary to the character (as opposed the look) is foolish. He deserved one for Two Towers so I hope an Oscar goes his way. It was a shame to not have screen time for Lee but the film works well without him and it was a brave move by the editors.

The special effects do not stand out - and that's a compliment. Even in state of the art movies of late I have been aware that I could be watching a video game. Here I only occasionally noticed that things were clear computer effects, even though the majority of the film was! This is how they SHOULD be used - not as a draw in their own right but as part of the film. Whether it be the massive battle scenes that are spectacular or the animated spider or just the fact that I forget that Gollum is only an effect, I cannot fault it's use of effects or the sheer visual feast that is this film.

I have tried not to gush because there will be plenty of others to do that without me joining them, but it is hard to really fault this film. It is the strongest of the trilogy and brings it all together really well, it is an emotional event more than a film and, if Jackson needs 20 minutes of slow closure to finish it to his satisfaction then I can give him that in return for all the hours of wonderful cinema that he has given me.
2003-12-25
The best movie out of all
I've watched all the movies several times. I really like them. I'm not going to talk about the story line much because I can't possible explain everything without giving away spoiler. So the only things I'm going to mention is that though the first movie started slow and second movie was amazing with that epic battle for the keep the third movie kept me at the edge of my seat the whole time. There was development with Aragorn's story line and this is the thing I loved most. The Return of the King is the jewel in the crown and the best movie in my opinion. I would highly recommend it to every fantasy fan out there. But if you are going to watch the movies be sure to check out The Hobbit first since it's a prelude to The Lord of the Rings.
2017-02-23
Best that could be made but still not a great film
I don't believe that Return of the King is a great film, or that Jackson's trilogy is a great trilogy in the sense that the Godfather films are great. That being said, I don't know if a better adaptation of LOTR could be brought to the big screen given the challenges that face any director attempting to make a film of Tolkein's books. For that reason I am reluctant to offer the following three criticisms:

possible *SPOILERS* and tedious literary analysis ahead.

1. Jackson doesn't address the underlying themes dealing with power, corruption, war, and so on contained in the books, or if he does address them he does so lightly and in passing. I liked Tolkein's books because, to me, they represented the attempt of a tweedy Oxford professor who grew up on King Arthur and Beowulf to come to terms with the modern horrors of the World Wars. Although the premise of the books was essentially silly, with plenty of elves and dragons and wizards, and the writing archaic (Tolkein's heroes are always "tall", just as heroes in Homer are always "godlike" or "royal" even when they are being cowardly), there was enough about the twentieth century tucked away that I found them well worth reading. Jackson portrays some of the horror of war (the children fighting in Helm's Deep in Two Towers), but his images are usually cliched (the friend dies, the mother loses her child) and the battle at Minas Tirith in Return of the King ends disappointingly with a big green CGI blob eating up the enemy armies. As well, the temptations of power tormented every character in the books who came face to face with the Ring - in the movies it's only Boromir who really agonises. 2. Like most literary heroes, the main heroes in Tolkein's books all underwent some sort of death and rebirth. Gandalf actually dies, Frodo appears to die when Shelob stings him, and Aragorn undergoes a symbolic death when he takes the Paths of the Dead. There are (not very exciting) reasons for this which go back to the earliest civilisations and which have profoundly influenced the development of a variety of world religions. This may have been too subtle for Jackson, however, as he adds another sequence into Towers where Aragorn appears to die and then returns dramatically. As a result, Aragorn's symbolic death and rebirth in Return of the Kings loses some of its resonance. 3. Particularly in Return of the King, Jackson avoids simple, direct storytelling and resorts to complicated action sequences. I think part of the problem is that, in Frodo, Jackson had to deal with an almost completely passive hero - all Frodo does is endure suffering - while making a movie for a modern audience with a taste for superhero protagonists. As a result, the sequence with Shelob becomes a tangled mess of running here and there, falling, fighting, and reconciling. The climax, as well, with Frodo at the Cracks of Doom, suffers mightily in comparison to the same scene in the book, which does not involve an extended tussle between Frodo and Gollum, nor the painfully overdone "hero hanging from the cliff while his buddy reaches for him and tells the hero to trust him" scene which we are subjected to in the movie.

In summary, Return of the King is, I believe, the best version of the book audiences are likely to see, given all the circumstances, but it is very much a light version of Tolkein's story.
2004-01-12
See Also
Write descriptive essay about The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King movie 2003, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King movie essay, literary essay The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King essay writing, narrative essay, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King 500 word essay, argumentative essay The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.
×