I´m a completely fan of Lord of the rings books, I consider the movies a good screem adaptation of the books, even when the movies are only a part of what the books are. Lord of the rings deserved to win the Oscar, is just amazing to make a movie of such a books.
I know this sounds weird, but yes, you are right, it is amazing. The only thing I would have liked more is if the filmmaker had done the whole thing solely from the human's perspective. The only truly interesting characters are either human (Boromir) or kind of human (Golum, I think) and the black riders. The elves are cool and the dwarfs are interesting, but none of them have any of the personality or the conflict of the humans. I know that is sacriligious, but its human struggles I car about. If Frodo can resist the power of the ring, then he is not very interesting. Picture Odysseus trying to get past the Sirens. He has to get his men to tie him to the ship. To me, it would be much more interesting if a Ranger was assigned to kill Frodo the minute he even looked at the Ring. In the Iliad, Ajax was the most interesting character because he was too proud to rely on any of the Gods to help him. I am going off on a tangent, but I think everyone enjoyed Golum because he represents a human struggle that is somewhat lacking in the other characters.
Gollum is a hobbit. I think - it's never more than implied that he was "hobbit-like". Also, the ring tempts all. Everyone faces that same choice when presented with the ring - just in varying intensities. Gandalf, Galadriel, Boromir, Faramir, Frodo, Gollum, and even Samwise. Bilbo was subconsciously betraying himself when Gandalf asked him to leave the ring behind. How they respond is partially due to their character, and partially due to their level of exposure. One thing I think Jackson has done especially well with is demonstrating how the ring is beginning to dominate Frodo's will. He is finding the burden heavier to bear the longer he has to, and it seems he's fighting the temptation to put it on more and more often. I have little doubt that the third movie will stay the course. Does the story imply that men are more corruptable by power than other races? It flat out says so. But the others struggle as well. I think each relationship to the ring is interesting in it's own right, because it says volumes about the underlying nature of the character.
With all due respect to LOTR I much rather perfer the older fantasy films that used the stop motion and puppetry over all this fancy smancy cgi nonsense. Give me Jason and the Argonauts, The old Sinbad films, Clash of the Titans and even Legend over LOTR any day.
When that friggin Achilleus stature turned his head and looked at the argonauts (I was probably around 6 or so when I say this) that was SCARY AS ************. Whenever I see reruns of that movie I still get quesy... And those skeleton dudes. Forget it.
      Except Tom Bombadil and Lady Goldberry - but unfortunately, they're not in any of the films. -G
I'm not sure about Lady Goldberry, but I think that Tom Bombadil is supposed to be the same race as Sauron.
Tom really brought nothing to the film... I would HIGHLY suggest that people either rent or buy the extended version and watch the behind the scenes discs. They give a lot of insight as to why they did the things they did and why the left off Tom. It really explains a lot, and after watching it I couldn't agree with PJ more. I believe that he did a wonderful job with the films and deserves a ton of credit. I know I might get flamed here, but I could care less, I think that those who whine that the movie isn't exactly like the book have no concept on how a film is made. It would take hours upon hours to be 100% faithful to the book and there would be parts that would just drag on and get boring. PJ did it right. LOTR is turning out to be one of my favorite movies of all time.