Hadrina
The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful
Neive Bellamy
Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.
Nicole
I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.
Eric Stevenson
I think this may in fact be the first Ralph Bakshi movie I've ever seen. He's mostly forgotten today, but he really was all the rage back in the 1970's, easily the worst decade ever for animation. I guess most of his stuff doesn't hold up well, but we can at least appreciate it. Well, most of us should be familiar with "The Lord Of The Rings". This manages to cover the first two movies in only about two hours. It's still one of the longest animated films ever made. I can always appreciate cartoons that work hard to be epic, given how few of those there are.At first I thought this was a direct sequel to the animated Hobbit TV movie made in 1977. It's easy to tell it isn't, given how different the animation is. Wouldn't you know it, they made a Return Of The King version that isn't connected to either! Anyway, the film itself is at least passable. It is pretty awkward seeing them try to cram all of this stuff in just one movie which is short by the other film's standards! The plot is mostly the same and there aren't many significant changes from the book or at least no more than the live-action movies. The most notable thing about this movie is of course the animation.Eh...it's hard for me to really judge it. A lot of it comes off as very realistic which is kind of odd for a fantasy movie. There's definitely some creativity here, especially with the live-action parts thrown in. The colors are usually nice, but they can be gaudy. It's hard to stand how weird these characters look. Gollum is okay, but he's no Peter Jackson version. This voice just doesn't cut it. It's even hard to keep up with how weird everything looks. It gets a bit dull at times. I would not recommend this film, but I can still appreciate how there's some hard work to adapt such a beloved story. The new movies are infinitely better, but this could have at least been worse. **1/2
mrscerullo
Now those of you who watched the Peter Jackson adaptions of the book first, I can understand the disappointment you may have seeing this animated version from the 1970s. If however, you were growing up during the late 20th century when this was the only version available to you, I'm sure you probably have now a completely different opinion, in fact you may even look upon it oppositely.When I was very young I was enthralled by this film - it was well animated and the use of rotoscoping for the Orcs really works a treat. The Orcs are genuinely frightening for younger audiences and I sometimes wonder that had the film been made today, would they be at all? The 1970s was a glorious time for powerful disturbing imagery, we saw it in many commercials for the period and it has not been spared here.Almost all the characters in this adaptation have the perfect voice actors. I particularly liked John Hurt as Aragorn and I also liked William Squire as Gandalf very much. You can tell that they really researched their roles here and executed it with passion. The other great thing with this film is the music score, almost the same as in 'The Car' (same composer) but here it really is perfectly suited.The artwork you may find familiar-- any fans of HR Giger out there? Well he designed much of the beautifully haunting backdrops for the film and combined with all these great talents, this movie really deserves appreciation. In fact Peter Jackson himself gives much credit to Ralph Bakshi for his efforts.It not without its flaws though I assure you. For one thing, Sam is IN LOVE with Frodo, and he is also quite irritating at times. The film is indeed cut short but believe there was due to be a following film later which never materialised. There are other things but they're really just quibbles.It's a very enjoyable animation, just don't compare it to Peter Jackson works.
SnoopyStyle
It's J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings books 'The Fellowship of the Rings' and 'The Two Towers'. Hobbit Frodo Baggins must guard the one most powerful ring against powerful dark forces with the help of Gandalf, Samwise and others.Ralph Bakshi directed Wizard. Using the same rotoscoping of live-action footage, it has that fascinating 70s animation style. It's actually very effective for the material especially since the needed special effects haven't been perfected yet. The style is definitely a very interesting vision and gives an adult sensibility in the animation. However there are limitations with the compressed nature of the film and it also doesn't help that this movie never got the needed sequel. It ends in an unsatisfying cliffhanger. It's a fascinating cinematic oddity but not much more.
Rainey Dawn
This movie is not directly a sequel to the Rankin/Bass 1977 TV movie The Hobbit but among fans, including myself, it is the second film in the series (it's just not officially the sequel).I was about 6 years old when I saw this TV movie. I can still recall being excited and engrossed in the story. It is a captivating film although it is by no means perfect. I can still enjoy this classic today. There is no comedy in this flick even though it is a cartoon - it really is a mature film that adults can enjoy.Watching the film all these years later: the animation is gorgeously dark and vivid & the storytelling is superb! The is a delicious mixture of animated live action along with the actual hand-drawn animation - well done! No wonder this film stood out in my childhood memories!This is well worth watching if you are a fan of the books, Peter Jackson's film series or the old TV movie The Hobbit.9.5/10
