The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
Year:
2001
Country:
USA, New Zealand
Genre:
Drama, Action, Adventure, Fantasy
IMDB rating:
8.8
Director:
Peter Jackson
Alan Howard as The Ring
Noel Appleby as Everard Proudfoot
Sean Astin as Sam
Sala Baker as Sauron
Sean Bean as Boromir
Cate Blanchett as Galadriel
Orlando Bloom as Legolas
Billy Boyd as Pippin
Marton Csokas as Celeborn
Megan Edwards as Mrs. Proudfoot
Michael Elsworth as Gondorian Archivist
Mark Ferguson as Gil-Galad
Ian Holm as Bilbo
Christopher Lee as Saruman
Elijah Wood as Frodo Baggins
Storyline: An ancient Ring thought lost for centuries has been found, and through a strange twist in fate has been given to a small Hobbit named Frodo. When Gandalf discovers the Ring is in fact the One Ring of the Dark Lord Sauron, Frodo must make an epic quest to the Cracks of Doom in order to destroy it! However he does not go alone. He is joined by Gandalf, Legolas the elf, Gimli the Dwarf, Aragorn, Boromir and his three Hobbit friends Merry, Pippin and Samwise. Through mountains, snow, darkness, forests, rivers and plains, facing evil and danger at every corner the Fellowship of the Ring must go. Their quest to destroy the One Ring is the only hope for the end of the Dark Lords reign!
Type 1080p
Resolution 1920x1080 px
File Size 3790 Mb
Codec h264
Bitrate 2320 Kbps
Format mkv
Download
Type DVD-rip
Resolution 480x234 px
File Size 792 Mb
Codec mpeg4
Bitrate 504 Kbps
Format avi
Download
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x1080 px 3790 Mb h264 2320 Kbps mkv Download
DVD-rip 480x234 px 792 Mb mpeg4 504 Kbps avi Download


Reviews
Good movie; good action!
The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring is a great film. While a popular complaint is that it is a long, slow movie, I totally disagree with that. The film develops its plot at a good pace unlike other movies that force the entire plot(when they have a plot) down your throat. I'd compare it to Star Wars--epic, long, and fun. Hey, for the people that like LOTR(and we are lots of people), having the movie three hours long is a good thing; we get more movie for our buck! Still, I can see that people who don't like anything related with fantasy will find it boring...but what did you expect?

But, there are some great action sequences. All of the action is very well done and none of it is over-the-top violence. There are five distinct battle scences along with several other thrilling sequences and the long journey in the Caves of Moria. Some other reviewers have stated that the action/violence is too much; I would disagree with you. Without the action sequences, LOTR would be Star Wars(only the original three will do thank you very much Mr. Lucas) without any starship fights or jedi duels...the action is part of the story(without overpowering the story)?

The movie is also top quality in acting, sound, and effects. In my opinion, Boromir was the best character; he had the best internal battle: he wanted to take control of the ring to save his people when in fact he knew that it would corrupt him. Even thought he was a flawed character unlike Aragorn(cool character but not too deep as of yet), Boromir had my sympathy and I could understand his desire to wield the ring to protect his people. Sound was great...a little too much at times. And, the effects were top notch without being overdone. Unlike Star Wars: The Phanton Menace where the effects MADE the movie(actually Natalie Portman was the best effect but that's another story), the special effects in the LOTR seem to complement the story.

My only problem with the story is that it doesn't have a hot blond princess in need of rescue(LOTR is like the Chronicles without Laurana...)

SPOILERS BELOW:

Aragorn chopping the head of the bad guy was tres cool! A little Gladiator-like but wayz cool! Maybe a bit violent for the kids...

Boromir's death sequence was unbelievable(in a good way)! Sean Bean made Boromir's death seem confincing, painful, and heroic; most other heroic deaths are usually very silly but this one was "real." Why the hell didn't he get the Oscar for that?

In the screenplay when Gandalf gets dragged down the chasm by the Balrog, he says, "Fly, you fools" where as in the movie he says, "Run, you fools!" In my opinion, the screenplay gets it right!

END SPOILERS

I just hope The Two Towers and Return of the King are equally good as Fellowship of the Ring...I have no reason to doubt it!!!

2002-03-31
THE BEST FILM EVER MADE!!!!
This movie could not have been better!! Peter Jackson smothers you in a world of enchantment and shows you things you never want to forget!! People might say that it was to unreal and the wizard's duel was dumb and to 'magical'! Thats where the term "F-A-N-T-A-S-Y" comes in!! This was an epic adventure with no flaws at all!! This amazing film, although it did not get BEST PICTURE ( WHICH IS BECAUSE THE AWARD PICKERS ARE WAITING UNTIL THE 3RD INSTALLMENT IS MADE), this is truly the greatest movie that has ever been made. It takes you back to Middle Earth and never lets you go, Lord of the Rings is amazing, enchanting, engrossing, incredible, enthralling, thrilling, terrific, and above all, PERFECT!!!!!!
2003-03-22
Awesome
I know it's been out for a while, but it is still awesome. Great cast of actors. Awesome work!! I have not enjoyed a movie so much in my life, I could watch it over and over and over if I had the time, but of course I have to do something constructive with my life and my employer won't stand for it.
2003-02-23
Speechless
Upon first seeing this film, I was astounded. There were no words. And still, no words come at times to describe the beauty and majesty of this great achievement in modern cinema. Whoa. That was just a lot of words. Today must be a good day.

Complete with a great cast, a great crew, great visual aspects, and a great script, this film is simply wonderful. When put together with the other two in this trilogy, it should be a greater thing in itself than the Star Wars trilogy ever was. A classic for a new generation.
2002-08-07
Amazing, breathtaking, brilliantly wonderful!!
This film is the most amazing journey I have ever been on. Not only was the movie enjoyable at the time, but I am holding my breath until the next one comes out! Although there are many characters in this film, it is made simple to follow and absolutley entertaining to watch. There is no lack in performance, particularly by Ian Holm (Bilbo Baggins), Orlando Bloom (Legolas), Viggo Mortensen (Aragorn), and Hugo Weaving (Elrond), oh yeah and Elijah Wood (Frodo Baggins) oh and also Cate Blanchett (Galadrial)..did I also mention Liv Tyler??? (Arwen). Look, the whole cast is just amazing, I really can't complain about lack of talent, and believe me, I'm picky. Don't go and see this movie if you are looking for just something short and funny. This is a deep movie which has great morals such as "Even the smallest person can change the course of the future", and will leave you pondering it for days afterwards and you may perhaps start reading the books! It is simply a dream...all the actors you could ever hope for under one roof! This movie is both magical, and suspensful. I recommend it to those who love fantasy and movies with lots of substance. This really is a journey you won't want to miss!
2002-07-06
Embrace the magic
It is with no surprise that Peter Jackson's The Fellowship of the Ring film has received such mixed critics. Many viewers refer to it as being childish, boring and uninteresting. Seems to me that it is bound to the same fate of Tolkien's books, destined to be a target for the same type of misunderstandings that keep attacking this literary masterpiece many decades after it's first publication.

Having read the books several years ago, I went to see this `impossible' film when it came out with many doubts on my mind. I really liked it, but left the theater with as many doubts as I had before. Was it perfect? Well, maybe not, but what an achievement. After watching it a few times on DVD, and thinking about it for some time now, I find myself loving this film more and more. Let me tell you why...

The Lord of the Rings is a fairy-tale of myth and fantasy. Peter Jackson directed a film that was considered, for a very long time, impossible to make, and not only for technical reasons. The narrative roots are incredibly long and detailed, and the storyline is deeply connected with the creation of a fantastic continent from a time unknown called `Middle Earth'. It's author, Tolkien, dedicated a considerable part of his life developing this continent's background, it's mythology and origins, it's different kinds of people, cultures and languages, and therefore it's geographic references are determinant to the unfolding of the story of the One Ring.

Peter Jackson went out to achieve the impossible and came out with a recreation of the original that is pure and true to the story in every detail. The first time the four hobbits meet a black rider on the road, for example, is absolutely faithful to the feeling of the book. The assault of the riders at Weathertop is another great example, and it captures that feeling of danger, density and atmosphere that are the main characteristics of the tale. Jackson also took some liberties with the story, and made some right choices along the way. If the so called `purists' may not approve the removal of Tom Bombadil altogether, it should be comprehensible that the travel from Hobbiton to Rivendel is a very long and detailed one and could easily make a movie on it's own. I felt more uneasy with how short the Council of Elrond was. In the book, the council is where the whole story of the rings is first explained, and many passages from the past ages of Middle Earth are unveiled. It is a fascinating moment of the story, that had to be shortened for obvious reasons. Still, after some consideration, I now agree with the options made by Peter Jackson, and think that the movie prologue narrated by Galadriel was the wisest choice. The magic is all there when Gandalf shuts his eyes the moment Frodo stands in the council and says `I will take the ring'. It is there at Moria's Gate, and at the fall of Boromir. It is a powerful film that doesn't fit the rhythm of the standard Hollywood action movie. It is a film that breeds, that takes time to unfold, it's tale branching in every direction.

I could go on and on, talking about all the different elements that bring this film close to perfection, but I'll end saying that deep down, this is not about action, beards and big monsters. The greatest thing about this film, to me, is that it brought me back to a time when I was in love with a different world where everything was possible. Reading The Lord of the Rings night after night, I came to understand what this thing of `mankind' really was all about. The corruption of absolute power, the importance and value of friendship, the inevitability of growing up, the strength of hope... That this film could capture that magic, and be a new bearer to it's message of humanism, is a statement to it's greatness. Gandalf's words, that even the smallest person may change the course of the world, and have a part to play in the destiny of all, are immortal.

In the end, this is a wonderful film, but that doesn't mean you are going to like it. I cannot tell you what it is like to see this film if you don't know or love the book. But I hope it may plant a seed on your heart to discover a great world of fantasy, beauty and humanity. I believe Tolkien would have liked that.
2002-10-08
Frodo Row Your Boat Ashore
"With the help of a courageous fellowship of friends and allies, Frodo embarks on a perilous mission to destroy the legendary 'One Ring'. Hunting Frodo are servants of the Dark Lord Sauron, the Ring's evil creator. If Sauron reclaims the Ring, Middle-earth is doomed," according to the DVD sleeve description, "Winner of four 'Academy Awards', this epic tale of good versus evil, friendship and sacrifice will transport you to a world beyond imagination."

Reading the original J.R.R. Tolkien novels was an intellectual rite of passage; whilst young, you read and enjoyed "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy willingly - prepping with "The Hobbit", of course. "It's a job that's never started that takes the longest to finish," someone said. Writer/director Peter Jackson's "The Fellowship of the Ring" is the first of an extremely well-produced trilogy. Understandably, it's made into a special effects extravaganza, without taking many breaths for thoughtfulness.

"The Bridge of Khazad-Dûm" (#30 on your DVD menu) sequence is a highlight; it climaxes with the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen) and the demonic Balrog (CGI) falling into an abyss, from which return seemed impossible This was one of my most memorable "Lord of the Rings" reading experiences - a future without Gandalf was unimaginable. Mr. Jackson and company recreate some emotional scenes extraordinarily well. At one time, it seemed impossible to think that such literature could be brought to cinematic form.

******** The Fellowship of the Ring (12/10/01) Peter Jackson ~ Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen, Viggo Mortensen, Orlando Bloom
2009-11-09
Set pieces...battles...set pieces...battles...
THE LORD OF THE RINGS has its admirers who are familiar with the plot and the strange characters inhabiting it--and who genuinely love the book and were eager to see their favorite story on the big screen.

In this case, it helps if you are familiar with the plot and the characters because the screenplay is a murky one with none of the characters given enough time for us to understand what they are all about. Instead, we move from set piece to set piece (grand, beautiful sets abetted by dazzling visual effects) and in between each new grand view locale there's another battle of good vs. evil with weapons clashing in every direction and limbs lopped off as fierce battles ensue.

It's a sort of dungeons and dragons world and if this is your thing then this is your dark movie adventure. I saw this on video rather than the big screen so I can assure you it probably all looks a lot grander on the theater screen with the deafening stereo sound effects adding to the vigor of the story. But none of the characters really stand out amid all this swordplay and skullduggery.

Only Ian McKellen and Elijah Wood have substantial enough parts to connect a viewer to the movie. The others are all backgrounders without becoming characters we care about--with the exception, perhaps, of Christopher Lee as Saruman the White, who always makes a convincing villain. Another problem is the sound--voices are dropped so often that much of the stilted dialogue is muted. This is a special drawback because several of the actors have some sort of accent. The worst offender happens to be Ian McKellen who nevertheless gives a very compelling performance behind his grizzly make-up--however, someone should have dubbed some of his lines for greater clarity. The likeable Elijah Wood relies on his specialty--wide-eyed wonder or tense concern for close-ups, but it's rather a one-note performance.

All in all, I was disappointed. With all of the hype (and due to some of the comments expressed here) I expected a much more substantial story than this, especially for a movie with a running time of almost three hours. The drawback on video is that many of the special effects are pretty obvious and the big screen grandeur is lost even when viewed on a large TV screen.

A bit of a letdown in every department. Even the score only occasionally has the right mystical quality between battles. The battles are not quite as brutal as those in GLADIATOR but their intensity is just as great and they turn up with alarming frequency!
2002-09-21
The greatest fantasy film of all-time
An absolutely gorgeous adaptation of J. R. R. Tolkien's first LORD OF THE RINGS installment detailing how well-meaning young hobbit Wood unwittingly inherits a ring from his adventurous uncle Holm which possesses a dark force that is powerful enough to end all life in Middle-Earth. Visually wondrous even for those who aren't that into the fantasy genre. This installment is particularly charming for less action and more character development… and, for some reason, the Middle-Earth lingo works really well in this movie over the second and third films. Although FELLOWSHIP merely teases the viewer with the appearance of Gollum—while TWO TOWERS and RETURN are basically owned by Serkis as Tolkien's timelessly wretched creature who's not quite friend or foe—the movie is just too lovable to really even need his inclusion. McKellen is perfect as Gandalf the Grey, and Bean's performance brings to the foreground the genius of all these characters who suffers from similar temptations and weaknesses that we do in reality. It is FELLOWSHIP that holds the clearest mirror up to us, while the following two films kind of just linger in the wartime aftermath. The greatest fantasy film of all-time.

**** (out of four)
2014-11-29
Greatest `Fantasy' Book become greatest `Fantasy' film
I think it is important to remember that Peter Jackson took up this film not in order just to make a film of `The Lord of the Rings' but because he wanted to make a 'fantasy just like the `The Lord of the Rings'" as he himself put it. After repeating that phrase on a number of occasions the question popped into his mind: "Well, why not the `The Lord of the Rings' itself?". In doing this he, of course, set himself an enormous challenge: he had to make a really good `fantasy' film, one which would stand on its own and be true to what he had originally wanted to do but he would also, and here the task he had set himself was enormous, be true to the original book and to make a film which the legions of people who have loved this book would feel happy with. In the latter task he was certainly not helped by the author or the book: Tolkein, it would seem, hated cinema. The book itself is `HUGE': this was not going to be the kind of task that the James Ivory team set themselves, or Scorsese nor the kind of task facing Branagh with Hamlet; nor was it going to be like the puny task that faced Columbus with `Harry Potter' who had the bigger budget ($130 million for one film as compared with Peter Jackson with $300m for three).

I have just seen the first `volume' and can say without hesitation that he has succeeded in both his goals. It is not the book but a reading of the book which is inventive and fascinating. It is the kind of experience that makes you want to go back and reread the whole thing in the light of the emphases that Jackson has brought to the story. He focuses on the corrupting influence of the ring and, through this focus, the character of the chief protagonists of the story are revealed. Clearly those most tempted by it are mortal men (Boromir and even, in one moment, Aragorn), those who already have power (Elrond - `The ring cannot stay here'; Galadriel; Gandalf and Saruman), and, of course, those who would not normally desire it but who by accident become ring bearers - Gollum, Bilbo, Frodo. I can see why, in this reading, Jackson decided to leave out the Bombadil episode. Bombadil, like the Balrog, is beyond the ring but the latter is important to the unfolding of the story of the fates of all the characters, Bombadil isn't.

It is a miracle of this reading of the first volume of the book that one can see where Jackson is going and one can get a feel of how the reading is going to unfold. In a sense, Jackson's real trial - as far as those who know the books are concerned - will come with the second film in the series. He has lived up to our expectation by creating even bigger ones: how can he handle the story of the chase andrescue of Merry and Pippin, the storming of Isengard etc - stories which don't really add much to the core theme that is emerging. Or is he now going to add the theme of the great contest of good versus evil to the unfolding reading?

All of this points to the fact that the film, even though it is a feast of special effects, focuses on character. And this also explains why Jackson chose the actors he did for their roles: they are not `big' names - no `Sean Connery', no `Alan Rickman', no `Brad Pitt', no `Sam Neill'etc. He didn't want them getting in the way of the story of character. Ian McKellan's talents, in particular, are used to tell a large proportion of the story: an enormous amount is conveyed simply through his facial expressions and even by the language of his body. The other miracle in all of this is Elijah Wood. Like many others, when I first heard of Jackson's choice, I groaned: but Wood has been extraordinary. He brings, as one friend said, a strange kind of androgyny to the role and this is just perfect. McKellan has already been knighted: give Wood the Oscar.

And then there is Middle Earth: this is, as someone put it, another character in the story and the New Zealand landscape, digitally enhanced on occasion, lives up to its role too.

Enough. See this film! Greatest film ever made? How can one make a claim like that! Silly really; as silly as claiming that `The Lord of the Rings' is the greatest book ever written. Can't one simply love a story, enjoy reading it a number of times amd lose oneself in it. One CAN claim that it is the greatest work in its genre as is the film.

10/10
2001-12-22
Download The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring movie 2001 by Peter Jackson Actors: Alan Howard, Noel Appleby, Sean Astin, Sala Baker, Sean Bean, Cate Blanchett, Orlando Bloom, Billy Boyd, Marton Csokas, Megan Edwards, Michael Elsworth, Mark Ferguson, Ian Holm, Christopher Lee, Lawrence Makoare, Elijah Wood - , the lowest price, high speed.The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring full movie online.The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring HD movie are available too (720p and 1080p). The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring Drama, Action, Adventure, Fantasy download. download movies USA, New Zealand
×