Typically a 10/10 review should be looked at skeptically and is only deserved by a near perfect film. I've seen this one so many times that I can barely watch it anymore but I still think it is deserving of a high score especially compared to the other two films in the trilogy (I'm not even gonna mention The Hobbit films).
FotR does a lot of things right and it feels the most structured. One could say that it is the easiest because it has the most linear story to adapt from given the source material, but it still has the burden of introducing all the elements in a time where CGI has really just learned to walk upright (and should probably not even be used for some things), and the latter two films benefit overwhelming from its success. Really ToT and RotK piggy-back off of this movie because most of what makes them great starts here. However, most of what makes them lacking is barely even present in FotR.
In fact, by picking apart their flaws, FotR easily becomes the better film. The ToT begins to meander midway through the movie and it really just loses focus of the character as it tries to build up towards the battle sequence, only to get outdone in RotK. ToT really becomes obsolete afterwards and, having made little inroads to developing the characters, it becomes the trilogies weakest link.
In fact, the characters often become silly representations of who they were as presented in the first film, and since they're was plenty to draw from in the books, there is really no excuse not to flush them out. Unfortunately the characters often become silly caricatures, glossed over in favor of larger cinematic sequences.
These problems persist into the third film, but fortunately a strong climax saves RotK and elevates it to a greater work of art, and by most people's accounts the best of the three. However, I think people tend to laud it for more superficial reasons and since it does suffer from a slightly dragged out narrative that harmed the second movie, and people tend to forget the impressive lift given by the first film.
Now onto the merits of FotR. First of all the prologue does a great job of expediting Tolkien history without turning off unfamiliar audiences. The tension building first act feels like a superb alternative to the gothic, Tim Burtonesque Legend of Sleepy Hollow, without feeling out of place in the grand scheme of things. Still impressive to me are the ways in which forced perspective is used in many scenes to account for the difference in size between the characters. A lot of other tropes that become tired and overused in the subsequent films, i.e. the eye of Sauron, and the shadow world, are at this point still ingenious visual representations.
As the second half of the film expands the story into the greater world, the film only becomes more refined. The sequence in Moria is intense and tragic, as is the final scene at Amon Hen when the characters are broken apart. What is of great importance though is how Peter Jackson is a little more subtle and restrained here.
As the trilogy goes on, and even as Jackson gets into directing the Hobbit films (okay, so I mentioned them), his action sequences tend to get more and more over the top. He tries to sneak in a little of the implausibly unrealistic action with the scene on the stairs in Moria, but it doesn't take away from the film and rather actually adds to the suspense in this instance. Later overtures of his tend to be a little eye-roll inducing, but here he doesn't yet get too carried away with himself.
Thankfully so, because the character deaths are tastefully done. Gandalf's fall into the abyss is truly a loss, only to be turned itself into an action sequence in the second film's introduction (though I must admit, it is a cool sequence).
Even more tragic is the death of Boromir, which to me is the highlight of the entire trilogy. Boromir's arc sort of demonstrates the inner conflict that all the other characters only talk about. In the latter films, Frodo and Gollum represent the same conflict, but by then they've fallen nearly into parody of it so its not as deeply felt. Here Boromir becomes an example of what not to do for the trilogy's real protagonist, Aragorn, a.k.a the one true King, but the movies lose sight of this the further they go on. More is drawn up about his artificial love life than his temptation with power, but I digress.
The point is, FotR really nails what its trying to be, but as the trilogy goes on the filmmakers aren't really sure what they're trying to say. "There's good in this world and its worth fighting for" " I am no man" " Hold me Ani, like you did on Naboo"... alright that last one was cheap, but honestly there are times when the message is overpronounced, even when it isn't something ever given in the books! In contrast the FotR concisely picks up on the Tolkien's themes about the temptation of power. Of all the films, it is the closest to matching the literary masterpiece that inspired it and so, in my humble opinion, it is really the superior entry in the Tolkien Cinematic Universe.
FotR does a lot of things right and it feels the most structured. One could say that it is the easiest because it has the most linear story to adapt from given the source material, but it still has the burden of introducing all the elements in a time where CGI has really just learned to walk upright (and should probably not even be used for some things), and the latter two films benefit overwhelming from its success. Really ToT and RotK piggy-back off of this movie because most of what makes them great starts here. However, most of what makes them lacking is barely even present in FotR.
In fact, by picking apart their flaws, FotR easily becomes the better film. The ToT begins to meander midway through the movie and it really just loses focus of the character as it tries to build up towards the battle sequence, only to get outdone in RotK. ToT really becomes obsolete afterwards and, having made little inroads to developing the characters, it becomes the trilogies weakest link.
In fact, the characters often become silly representations of who they were as presented in the first film, and since they're was plenty to draw from in the books, there is really no excuse not to flush them out. Unfortunately the characters often become silly caricatures, glossed over in favor of larger cinematic sequences.
These problems persist into the third film, but fortunately a strong climax saves RotK and elevates it to a greater work of art, and by most people's accounts the best of the three. However, I think people tend to laud it for more superficial reasons and since it does suffer from a slightly dragged out narrative that harmed the second movie, and people tend to forget the impressive lift given by the first film.
Now onto the merits of FotR. First of all the prologue does a great job of expediting Tolkien history without turning off unfamiliar audiences. The tension building first act feels like a superb alternative to the gothic, Tim Burtonesque Legend of Sleepy Hollow, without feeling out of place in the grand scheme of things. Still impressive to me are the ways in which forced perspective is used in many scenes to account for the difference in size between the characters. A lot of other tropes that become tired and overused in the subsequent films, i.e. the eye of Sauron, and the shadow world, are at this point still ingenious visual representations.
As the second half of the film expands the story into the greater world, the film only becomes more refined. The sequence in Moria is intense and tragic, as is the final scene at Amon Hen when the characters are broken apart. What is of great importance though is how Peter Jackson is a little more subtle and restrained here.
As the trilogy goes on, and even as Jackson gets into directing the Hobbit films (okay, so I mentioned them), his action sequences tend to get more and more over the top. He tries to sneak in a little of the implausibly unrealistic action with the scene on the stairs in Moria, but it doesn't take away from the film and rather actually adds to the suspense in this instance. Later overtures of his tend to be a little eye-roll inducing, but here he doesn't yet get too carried away with himself.
Thankfully so, because the character deaths are tastefully done. Gandalf's fall into the abyss is truly a loss, only to be turned itself into an action sequence in the second film's introduction (though I must admit, it is a cool sequence).
Even more tragic is the death of Boromir, which to me is the highlight of the entire trilogy. Boromir's arc sort of demonstrates the inner conflict that all the other characters only talk about. In the latter films, Frodo and Gollum represent the same conflict, but by then they've fallen nearly into parody of it so its not as deeply felt. Here Boromir becomes an example of what not to do for the trilogy's real protagonist, Aragorn, a.k.a the one true King, but the movies lose sight of this the further they go on. More is drawn up about his artificial love life than his temptation with power, but I digress.
The point is, FotR really nails what its trying to be, but as the trilogy goes on the filmmakers aren't really sure what they're trying to say. "There's good in this world and its worth fighting for" " I am no man" " Hold me Ani, like you did on Naboo"... alright that last one was cheap, but honestly there are times when the message is overpronounced, even when it isn't something ever given in the books! In contrast the FotR concisely picks up on the Tolkien's themes about the temptation of power. Of all the films, it is the closest to matching the literary masterpiece that inspired it and so, in my humble opinion, it is really the superior entry in the Tolkien Cinematic Universe.