Die Rückkehr des Königs

Lots of plot holes and missing charcaters and no context but the music, animation, voice acting, art style, and it's flairs make it too charming to hate on. Easily one of the best So Bad Its Good type of film.

the mistake some people make with this movie is to take it seriously. i don't know if it was meant to be, but it's quite impossible to do so. it's more the statement of a director and scriptwriter totaly gone ape and providing the viewer with plenty of hilarious scenes, especially when you've read the books:

some of the most cheesy and silly music ever used in a movie and also much too often, making it seem like some odd musical, that aside they even didn't take some of tolkiens original songs from the book, but made up some lew lyrics with hilarious outcome(the bearer of the ring...)

gollum looking like a frog with ears

elrond with a goatee

bilbo looking like granny from little red riding hood

orcs looking like...ehh how describe them, maybe something like frogs with fangs and horned helmets? however they like to sing "funny" marching songs("where's a whip there's a way")

pippin having an annoyingly thick american accent, making him sound like some baseball commentator

the nazgul on horses with wings and looking like sceletor with a wig

olifants looking like mammoths

denethor beyond description

sting does not only look like a lasersword it also SOUNDS a little alike

samwise the faithful praying "to the lord above" and often utters things like "heaven" and "god help us". got to be the first christian in middle-earth

add to this a plot that makes no sense with huge gaps and in return lot of nonsense and unnecessary parts added

however the scene that really cracked me up was this dream sequence where he and sam are lying in the grass in the shire and some orcs pass them by peacefully and wave them with some melancholic expression. see it, if you want to have a good laugh!

Having recently seen this version for the first time in a number of years, I can see its faults, but many of the reviewers here are way too hard on it. Tolkien's masterful trilogy was unfilmable in live action before the advent of CGI, but fans were clamoring for film versions anyway, and then hated them when they arrived. Oy veh! While this Rankin/Bass version was not as good as their THE HOBBIT, I still found it to be quite entertaining on its own level, as long as you don't compare it to Peter Jackson's impeccable epics. The voice cast was great, and it was quite ambitious for Rankin/Bass, known chiefly for their animated Christmas specials.

This film's haters should listen to the lyrics of one of Glenn Yarbrough's---It Is So Easy Not To Try. Rankin/Bass tried, and Tolkien fans who have expressed outrage over this would have been angrier if no one had tried back then. Everyone here needs to take a chill pill.

Although I quite enjoyed the Rankin-Bass kiddified version of `The Hobbit', this one just leaves something to be desired. All in all, it was just generally weak. Perhaps it was the huge gaps left out of the plot? The cheesy, twangy-wow-chicka rock music soundtrack? The Old-Western-state-the-obvious narration that won't stop yammering? Well, this family friendly rendition of the latter half of LOTR is still heaps better than the Bakshi 'Lord of the Rings', but isn't an amazing feat of filmmaking, either. The animation is choppy and TV quality, and the sound is awful. (though that's excusable, as it was a made for TV movie from 1980.) Everything else though, is passable.

Visually it isn't too bad, as everything is quite stylized and neat looking. Gandalf, in particular, looks quite good. But yes, it's oversimplified, and yes, it is filled with lots of corny songs. But wasn't the book filled with songs as well? Tolkien never mentioned anything about slap-bass or singing orcs, but actually including music helps in keeping with the original work. At least it should, in theory. Nice effort, anyway.

Biggest problems with this movie would have to be Merry and Pippin. Whereas in Ralph Bakshi's LOTR, they were actually tolerable - cute even. (Though that may be pushing it.) To Bakshi's credit, in his movie only one of the hobbits was mega-homely. However, in this version, both Merry AND Pippin have been given a severe thrashing with the ugly stick. Merry (same voice as Shaggy) has a face made from glued-together potatoes, and Pippin is an ape wearing clothes. His voice is like a piece of glass scraping against another piece of glass.

Besides that though, this movie is bearable, watch-able even. There are some `so bad it's funny' moments, (especially some of the songs) but there are also moments when it's very loyal to the action/dialogue of the book. It's good and bad at the same time - hence so many mixed reviews. Probably kids would enjoy it more than an adult viewer, although even kids would agree that this version is pretty watered-down and lame. 5 / 10, tops.

In the wake of Peter Jackson's incredibly successful Tolkien series, this movie tends to get a lot of flak. Yet in some regards, I actually prefer this version, and I'll explain why:

The difference of opinion is basically generational and dependent on what the viewer is looking for. If you are hooked on stunning visuals and "epic" proportions in every estimable regard, there is no denying that Peter Jackson's films are better.

While this film deviates from the plot in several instances--no doubt a consequence of condensing so much material into an hour-and-a-half--it does maintain some of the better quotes from the books; keep in mind that these lines are delivered in the style in which they were written, not watered down the way some of the most powerful quotes are in more modern versions.

Combine this with a cast of amazing voice actors (Brother Theodore is the best, creepiest Gollum, hands down; Paul Frees orc voices are chilling; Roddy McDowall and Orson Bean do incredible things; and, of course, John Huston; I am not familiar with the actor that plays Denethor, but I love that performance as well) and you've got what is basically an Elizabethan drama with watercolor backgrounds and animation.

The other major reason why people dislike this film, and again it was a creative choice, is the inclusion of songs. Peter Jackson made films for adults; these animated films are intended for children. I admit that the ratio of song to plot can get tedious in this film, but the reasoning is noble. If you've ever read The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings, you know it is absolutely packed with poetry. I am sure it was this film's intent to preserve this feeling while at the same time emulating the musical style which has been popular with children's programming for years.

In conclusion, people often criticize this film on matters of taste rather than actual merit. If you enjoy animation and well-written dialogue, this is definitely worth a look.