Gladys Hamilton (Seattle) i was told that I can migos The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King free download, but I did not believe, especially the year 2003 New York. Michael Whitehead (Lexington) Peter Jackson The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King free download Bluray at high speed, and even in the USA, New Zealand, Germany Cambridge.
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
An outstanding example of portrayal of a classic book
Thousands of comments have been made on this outstanding production and there is little left to write that has not already been written or said. Again, not surprisingly at last night's 'Oscars', the third film in the trilogy took most of the awards. Like others I could give glowing comments about content, acting, production, direction, visual effects etc. but will instead, convey what I consider to be equally important; that is the realistic and accurate portrayal of a classic masterpiece of literature from one of the world's most imaginative authors. I have tried and failed three times to completely read the book and I enjoy reading, but feel that I could now do so and have a better understanding of the story - only because I know that Peter Jackson set out to retain accuracy of the story. Sometimes our own imagination lacks the ability to see exactly what the author intended and if a film can help that, then it only adds to the experience. By timely coincidence as I write this my computer screen saver has put up a picture of a mountain valley in New Zealand - it must know what is in my mind. That beautiful country was perhaps the ideal setting for the film with its mystical landscape punctuated with mountain valleys, rivers, forests and open spaces. It cannot be far from what may have been in Tolkien's own mind.

I would perhaps add one comment about content. Although there was much reliance on computer visualisation it was well-balanced by emotional acting like the characters Gollum and Gandalf. Although Gollum was a villain, I actually was made to feel sorry for him at the end. Too many potentially good films are spoilt by substituting acting for over indulgence in special effects. This is an art that the producers and directors of this film had exactly right.

I hope that the success of this trilogy will herald a new era in film-making of classical stories. Our literature has a wealth of candidates, and even ones that have been tried could be re-visited now that such experiences as Lord of the Rings have proved financially viable and immensely popular.

2004-03-01
Best movie, of the best fictional world ever made
Best movie, of the best fictional world ever made, no doubt that this movie and the franchise itself are marked on the history of movies as the books are, Peter Jackson did a great job giving life to the marvelous work of J.J.R. Tolkien, even going a little bit further than Tolkien in the character development, in resume: 10/10
2017-09-22
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
Not only the best of the "Lord of the Rings" series, but sets a new standard of epic filmmaking.
Saying that this film starts where `Two Towers' left off is somewhat misleading, for the film starts a great distance from the walls of Helm's Deep. `Return of the King' opens with a flashback of Smeagol (Andy Serkis) obtaining the one ring of power and an origin of his deterioration into the creature Gollum. This opening recaptures an emphasis that was somewhat lost within the epic battles of `Two Towers,' at that's the ring. The first installment, `The Fellowship of the Ring,' provided heaps of exposition on the ring's importance and influence, and in `Return of the King,' we see it pay off, big time.

After the armies of Isengard have been defeated due to an allegiance between Theoden (Bernard Hill), the king of Rohan, and the elves, the main threat to middle earth is now concentrated in the kingdom of Mordor, controlled by the dark lord Sauron. Sauron has turned his eye towards the realm of Gondor, the last free kingdom of men, and the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellan) must warn Denethor (John Noble), Steward of Gondor of the impending attack, while Aragorn (Viggo Mortenson), heir to the throne of Gondor, and Theoden gather men to aid against the armies of Mordor. The dark lord Sauron needs only to regain the one ring of power to conquer all of middle earth, and two hobbits, Frodo (Elijah Wood) the ring-bearer and Sam (Sean Astin), must continue their journey, directed by Gollum, to Mount Doom, the only place where the ring can be destroyed. Got all that? If not, you need to bone up on your `Lord of the Rings' before expecting to follow this film.

Since all three epics were filmed simultaneously, each individually has the feel of being part of a larger picture - except for this one. `The Return of the King' is just too big, the most epic of a set of epic films. Now that director Peter Jackson has brilliantly constructed the characters and plotlines throughout the first two films, he puts them to use.

All of the characters have their best moments within this film. The pair of mischievous hobbits, Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd), are no longer the tree ornaments they were from `Two Towers,' but are split-up, and take their characters in completely new directions. Aragorn, played with an unmatched sense of honor by Viggo Mortenson, is about to meet his destiny as the future king of all men, while Andy Serkis continues his expert portrayal of Gollum (Serkis' provided not only the voice of Gollum, but also assisted during production by acting out the scenes of the computer-generated character with his fellow actors).

However, the real acting triumph of the film is Elijah Wood as Frodo Baggins. He continues his descent into corruption with an incredible talent that many could not pull off. Wood's performance is so critical to the film because it determines the ring's power to corrupt, which, needless to say, is absolute.

The first two films established Jackson as an incredible visionary, shooting vast landscapes from his native New Zealand. With `Return of the King,' Jackson really gets a chance to show off. With, hands down, the most beautiful visuals of the trilogy, Jackson makes `Return of the King' a gorgeous feast for the eyes, while never resorting to McG level over-the-topness. Jackson stays very grounded in his characters, not letting the effects tell the story, but only assist the wonderful dialogue and characters. Think of `Return' as a mix of `Fellowship' and `Two Towers,' with enough action and character development worthy of ending a film event of this magnitude.

The bottom line, fans of the films will not be disappointed. Hardcore Tolkien lovers might be upset by plot changes and interpretations made by Jackson and the other writers, however, it is unrealistic to expect a completely true adaptation of the novels, being that film is an entirely different medium. Despite the alterations, Jackson consistently stays true to the major themes and ideas from the original text, while adding some of the finest filmmaking ever put to screen. `The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King' is one of the most finely tuned and cinematically perfect films ever made. Not only the best of the trilogy, but a crowning achievement in epic filmmaking.
2003-12-16
Brilliant. Simply brilliant
Where to start with this masterpiece? Quite simply one of the greatest movies ever made. A fitting end to a stunning trilogy. The acting as it has been is brilliant again. Special mention must go to Sean Austin, for his performance as Sam. In this one he gets his big moment in the trilogy, and he nails it perfectly. His scenes with Elijah Wood (Frodo) on Mount Doom, as Frodo weakens are full of emotion and very powerful. As for the rest of the movie? It has one of the greatest scenes EVER in a movie : the riders of Rohan charging into battle outside Minas Tirith. You simply cannot tell where the real riders end, and the CGI begins. The battles again are well done, and not simply a repeat of the siege at Helms Deep in The Two Towers.

As I said, the acting is again first rate from the entire cast. And it was nice to see Andy Serkis getting his face on screen as Smeagol, before his transformation into Gollum.

By the end of the movie, there were more than a few tears as the boat left the Grey Havens, as the movie ended on a quiet emotional note, after the epic battles before.

I could happily have sat through this again and again. Well done to everyone, both in front and behind the cameras for such a brilliant work, but of course special mention has to go to Peter Jackson. He deserves every award he's received for this.

One last point. If you only seen the theatrical release, then go get the extended version of this film. It's even better!!
2005-09-01
LOTR ROTK Review
After the last two Lord of the Rings films, the journey of so many heroes has come so far, and it all leads up to this. Darkness falls upon all of Middle-Earth. Huge armies of orcs march upon the kingdoms of men. The One Ring comes closer to its evil master. Could this be the end of the world, or the start of a new beginning? This final chapter in the film series starts off with an incredibly moving sequence: the heartbreaking tale of Gollum's origins. From the on, it picks right back up where the last films left off, chronicling the journey of Frodo, Sam, and Gollum as they tread in dark and dangerous territory, combating orcs, one giant spider, and ultimately themselves as they approach the threshold of Mount Doom. At the same time, the film presents some of the biggest and most epic scenes ever committed to film: the Battle of Minas Tirith. It is a huge spectacle that fills up the entire screen with thousands and thousands of orcs, men, war machines, lumbering beasts, Nazgûl, cavalry, massive elephants, and even ghosts. It is a long struggle that fills up most of the movie's runtime, but it's always awe-inspiring. As if that's not enough, the film then brings the battle to the gates of Mordor, for one grand climax. Even in the calm before each battle, the film remains as captivating as its predecessors, thanks to its style and storytelling prowess. If there's anything to truly complain about, it would be the lengthy denouement. Overall, however, the experience of The Return of the King has never failed to invoke feelings of awe.

At this point, the characters of the film are well-established and intimately familiar, but the film does take its time to explore more of the familiar faces and elaborate on fresh new characters. They all come together to contribute to the multiple conflicts, tying every strand of the plot to one epic climax; it's a sublime union that makes everything in the three movies relevant, and provides satisfying closure all around. Many liberties are taken from the original novels, but for the big screen, it works to generate the best possible spectacle and make the plot work evenly. Themes of war, corruption, addiction, good and evil, and adventure all prevail.

As before, this film is crafted with excellent photography and editing. All the major players return and contribute fantastic performances in their respective roles (especially Viggo Mortensen, who stands out more in this film than before, but it is always a pleasure to watch Ian McKellen as Gandalf, along with the rest of the fellowship and all their allies). Writing is superb. This production boasts some excellent sets, props, and costumes. Special effects are huge; at its time, it was most groundbreaking for generating the biggest armies ever seen on screen all at once. Despite aging a bit, the effects are still impressive. Howard Shore's music score is as masterful as ever.

Return of the King delivers the best possible payoff for the Lord of the Rings trilogy (and it might even outshine the Hobbit saga in the end). Not only does it boast some of the biggest battles, but it is also a film with power and beauty. It has cemented itself as one of my all-time favorites (was my number-one favorite for quite a few years), and the Lord of the Rings saga overall remains one of the most sublime marriages between spectacle, storytelling, and style.

If you watch the Extended Edition of this film, you will be treated to about an hour of bonus scenes, which offers a lot of excellent substance. Among the additions, there are longer battle scenes, a scene showing the fate of Saruman and Wormtongue, an extended encounter with the Army of the Dead, a parley with the Mouth of Sauron, and more. I think most of these scenes are really awesome, and this version of the film is definitely worth seeing.

5/5 (Experience: Perfect | Story: Perfect | Film: Perfect)
2014-04-06
LOTR: CLASSIC, CLASSIC, CLASSIC
I knew it would be good, but this takes the entire cake. Peter Jackson has absolutely outdone himself with this masterpiece. True, there are a few tiny holes in the plot, but they are easily overlooked. Even if you're not a huge fan of Tolkien, you should really make an attempt to see this movie. I wasn't a fan of the books, but Jackson's movies have inspired me to pick them up and give them all a good read. Can't wait for the DVD. Let's see if Jackson does as good a job with The Hobbit.
2004-01-18
The first great cinematic masterpiece of the twenty-first century.
I am, I admit, an unlikely convert to the religion of Tolkienism. I have never read the books, having, I thought, been put off them for life by the sort of obsessive freaks who read them when I was at school. (One classmate, then aged about sixteen, told me with great pride that he had read the whole of 'The Lord of the Rings' at least fifty times). I also have never been a great admirer of the 'sword and sorcery' school of fantasy writing or film-making; indeed, some of this genre (mostly those starring the current governor of California) struck me as being among the worst films ever made. I was, however, persuaded to see the first in the trilogy, 'The Fellowship of the Ring', by its overwhelmingly positive reception from the critics, and was quickly won over by the scope of Peter Jackson's vision. I had been expecting some twee tale of elves, gnomes and fairies; what I experienced was a genuine epic (in the true sense of that overused word). Ever since December 2001, I have been waiting for parts two and three of the trilogy to be released. Neither has disappointed me. The story of 'The Lord of the Rings' is too complex to be told in a review such as this. Suffice it to say that it revolves around a magic ring which will give its possessor immense power. The power-hungry Dark Lord Sauron (a figure who is never actually seen on screen) desires to obtain the ring in order to dominate Middle Earth. His enemies, led by the wizard Gandalf, are seeking to destroy the ring, which can only be used for evil purposes, not for good. At the beginning of the final part of the trilogy, Sauron's forces are massing for an attack on the kingdom of Gondor. The film relates the story of the conflict which follows, and this leads to some of the most spectacular battle sequences I have seen, even more impressive than those in 'The Two Towers'. Inevitably, the film makes much use of computer-generated effects, but unlike many films dominated by special effects, plot and character are not neglected. The acting is uniformly good, and in some cases outstanding. Special mentions must also go to the camera-work, which made the best possible use of the magnificent New Zealand scenery, and to Howard Shore's memorable musical score. So, looking forward to the Oscar ceremony, I have no doubt that this should be the best film and that Peter Jackson, who has amply fulfilled the promise shown in the excellent 'Heavenly Creatures', should be best director. Best Actor? I would find it difficult to decide between the competing claims of Sir Ian McKellen, who brings wisdom, kindliness and the required touch of steel to his portrait of Gandalf, and of Elijah Wood, who plays the brave and resourceful hobbit Frodo to whom falls the dangerous task of ensuring the ring's destruction. Best Supporting Actor? My own nomination would be for Sean Astin, as Frodo's loyal companion Sam, but several others might have claims, notably Viggo Mortensen or Bernard Hill. Is this the best movie ever made, as some of its admirers have claimed? Possibly not- that is, after all, a very large claim to make. I have no doubt, however, that the trilogy as a whole is the first great cinematic masterpiece of the twenty-first century. It has certainly inspired me to start reading Tolkien's original novels. 10/10.
2004-02-04
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
This Christmas The Journey
The Fellowship makes its final path through war and wilderness. The story comes to an 11 academy award winning climax. The movie has a stunning power unlike the other two. Peter Jackson uses incredible insight into sstories and themes and character study. The Return of the King culminates its three story lines unimaginably. As the characters finish what is a three year journey you see exactly why Peter Jackson made the fellowship and the two towers because he wanted to arrive at this incredible finale to what is a career trilogy. I enjoyed this film for two main reasons action and intimacy. The action is stunningly realized by weta workshop. But even though the action is great at the center of it is what is a wonderfully intimate story. As Frodo and Sam make their way to Mount Doom we really get to see them both rise to the occasion. We see the real power of friendship as Gollum continues to try to break it. When Aragorn and Gandalf arrive at over 600.000 orcs and yet they stand as strong as they were at Helm's Deep. I become more amazed as the tale goes on we see how difficult and at what price will either side win. The feelings of community within us. This is a classic and whoever watches will not be disappointed. 10/10
2006-09-09
Roland J. Tran (Saint Paul) i was looking for a movie free The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King download, as 720p to download it in 2003, one of the first Peter Jackson Tallahassee. Clara J. Lovett (Buffalo) i love how they play Noel Appleby, Alexandra Astin, Sean Astin, David Aston, John Bach, Sean Bean, Cate Blanchett, Orlando Bloom, Billy Boyd, Sadwyn Brophy, Alistair Browning, Marton Csokas, Richard Edge, Jason Fitch, Bernard Hill from the movie director Peter Jackson 2003 Miami.
×