Ok! It's time for the Return of the King review!! You've both been waiting eagerly for it I know. I'll try not to include many spoilers and if I do I'll label them, so here goes...

My first feeling when I left the theatre wasn't amazement or anything like that, or disappointment...but it was a feeling of utmost satisfaction. Because I'd just seen a movie that I had unbelievably high expectations for, and I was satisfied on every level. There's really incredibly little to complain about, and I'm not worried about Saruman because I know the confrontation with him at Orthanc will be at the beginning of the DVD Ext Version.

One of the great things about this movie is that it's really long, but you have no idea. I sat in my seat, rapt, for over 3 hours and yet I had no sense whatsoever of the time passing. Now that's some good filmmaking. Another sign of just how well done this movie was, is that for the entire remainder of the day, including my 9hours at work and the hours in between, I couldn't stop thinking about it. All day I've been humming and whistling the great orchestral flows composed by Howard Shore.

The acting is excellent on all ends, Wood as Frodo is quite simply perfect, Astin does a marvelous job with Samwise, both Boyd and Monaghen do splendidly as Pippin and Merry. I was especially pleased with the the way Pippin's character changed throughout the movie. The song was done in an incredibly artful manner, and I absolutely loved it. McKellen literally inhabits Gandalf, bringing the wizard to life with his great acting skills. Bloom and Davies as Legolas and Gimli both continue to do a great job on their respective characters, and I was more than pleased to see the contest between the two continue in such grand fashion. Mortenson plays the perfect Aragorn, and it really makes you wonder, they almost cast another person for the part but changed it at the last minute - Viggo was signed on at the last minute when his son made damn sure he took that role. We're all thankful he did. Finally, Hill and Otto are excellent on all fronts with their characters Theoden and Eowyn.

All these wonderful performances are made the more real by the incredible job the folks down at Weta have done. Middle-Earth lives in these movies because of their hard work and dedication, and I give all the kudos in the world to all of the hardworking people there who did such an amazing job.

I don't have any gripes at all about the way the movie ended, I thought everyone knew that 'The Scouring of the Shire' had been cut out of the movie for all kinds of reasons, and I've accepted it. Tom Bombadil was cut out too and it didn't ruin anything...of course Scouring is far more important, but I understand the reasoning behind the cut, even though I would've been more than willing to sit and watch for another half an hour on top of the 20 min that it already runs for after the climax. But in terms of a film standpoint, it makes sense. I've heard enough critics gripe about the relatively puny 20 minutes of closure time at the end of the movie (and that just pisses me off).

So, now I'm going to gripe. About moron critics. To be honest, I'm sick and tired of all the comments of homoerotic relationships existing between the hobbits. Here's an example: "And the bond between them... becomes weirdly homoerotic. With Sam as his steadfast sergeant, literally carrying him through hell, the delicate Frodo writhes in sensual torment". That one blew me away. Now before you idiots jump on the bandwagon of homophobes, maybe you should think about something first...Tolkein was in the world wars. How many times do you think Tolkein saw soldiers carrying other half dead soldiers to safety? Or risking all to save their best friend. Do you worry about all of them being homosexual? Does it seem wrong? I think not. So what's the difference here, the bond isn't really that different.

Here's another quote from a critic: "What's alarming is that Jackson has made a powerful movie about a holy war, depicting it as an endeavour of unalloyed magnificence." Wow! This fellow obviously doesn't have a clue. So lets look at the holy war comment...well, it's not a holy war. It's not about a god or religion. It's about mankind, it's about the good races of the world. Was there any mention of religion on this movie? Is it even implied? I don't think so, and I don't think Tolkein had any intent of implying such. Next, Tolkein hated war, he wasn't depicting it as "an endeavour of unalloyed magnificence" he showed war as being something brutal, that takes and takes lives...this all stems from his world war experiences. His point was that valour can arise from such terrible times. I don't think Jackson did a bad job of representing these things. It's simply a critic that doesn't bother to see the whole picture when he makes his comments.

Anyhow, I think this is plenty long enough for now, and it's pretty late too. So I'll close out by saying that Everyone Needs to see this movie. It caps off the greatest trilogy in history in the best possible way. Peter Jackson and his crew have delivered, in full. Well done. This trilogy has set a benchmark that will not soon be matched.

~K

Any comments, suggestions, and flames about this review or anything else please send to: ks_world_blog@hotmail.com