Lord of the Rings - Ralph Bakshi Version (film review)

Damn, this film was just a mess. An ugly mess. The Lord of the Rings, masterpiece of Tolkien, tells the tale of a group of hobbits and Gandalf as they seek to destroy the one ring and save Middle-Earth from Sauron. At least, that was the plan. Peter Jackson pulled it off, but Ralph Bakshi just couldn't manage it. Shame, Fritz the Cat was so good.

A few millenniums ago, I made a music video to it, which has since been burned with fire. But the film stayed with me, so I hope you enjoy this review.

Also, if you're enjoying these review, please comment, rate, favourate and so on. I really want to get these out there for everyone to watch.

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• lord
• of
• the
• rings
• tolkien
• lotr
• bakshi
• fantasy
• epic
• movies
• film
• cinema
• failure
• ugly
• arse
• review

[TiniNormi]

Someone probably pointed this out already, but Jackson admits to directly lifting several shots/scenes from Bakshi's film and putting them in his own films.

[zanafarr]

Yes, he did. And if I ever get around to doing a scathing, vicious review of Jackson's work, I'd be sure to point and mock that too.

[lyriz465]

That wasn't a review so much as it was the absurd rantings of another fanboy.

Rotoscoping was used for years in animation, but you probably know of it today as "motion capture."

I am so tired of the laziest, cheapest computer graphics getting a pass while traditional animation is constantly being picked apart.

Besides Bashki's film, though it had some problems, you cannot ignore the genius of this animator who only comes behind Richard Williams in craftsmanship and ambition.

[zanafarr]

Actually, rotoscoping was used extensively before and after this film; including in some of Disney's films. Some of the best examples (if you ask me) can be seen in Bakshi's 'Heavy Traffic'. By the same director as this piece of shite. He made some excellent films, some exceptional works of art, but that doesn't make this particular one excusable.

[aaaiiieee]

As a nine year old watching this movie for the first time in a theater in 1978, I have to say that I was enchanted to say the least. I had no idea who Tolkien was or what the story was about.

There are many flaws in this movie but it will always have a place in my heart as a stepping stone to Tolkien's work and the written word as a whole!!!

[robtheheartboy]

Peter Jackson actually mentioned Ralph several times during the DVD commentary. But the fact of the matter is, Peter Jackson made a much better movie than Ralph Bakshi. Sorry, but you can't animate lord of the rings.

[avariambush]

@MasterofArda

Fritz the Cat & Lord of the Rings are both genius and both milestones in animation. Fire and Ice isn't bad either.

[MasterofArda]

@avariambush

Which of Bakshi's work is genius? This half-assed Lord of the Rings? The porno? The Conan the Barbarian rip-off? The Who Framed Roger Rabbit rip-off? Face it, fanboy, Bakshi's a hack compared to real geniuses in animation.

[avariambush]

Bashki's work is genius. Get a clue fatboy.

[aquelescaraaaaaaaaaa]

re-edited version of this film:

/watch?v=13kcUUkTyKg

includes switched endings, the Saruman/Aruman issue fixed and the Part One in the title screen. please enjoy it.

[MrsPennywise96]

This film was great. Sure, it's no where near as great as Peter Jackson's, but it's great.

[amaxamon]

Wow, you did zero research & have no clue what you're talking about.

[MasterofArda]

Thank God for Peter Jackson. That's all I have to say.

[Bandersnatch41]

this movie wasent that bad you dum fuck. the live action was amillion times better in almost every way. but this was certianly better than fritz the cat. and i do have to agree with you on some things like charactar apperances and names . bakshi did manage to fuck that up in his film. will give you that.

[LikaLaruku]

There is one thing I really liked in this movie l liked better than the Jackson version; Aragorn.

[IamthePopeRome]

What terrible blasphemy! Your review is "absolutely abominable".