gutsthealchemist I have fond memories of watching this version and Jackson's version as a kid. Watching it today reminds me that it's still pretty good. The animation is really well done and the voice acting is great too! I have to give props to the great John Hurt (yes, he's in this movie!) and Christopher Guard. Hurt voices Aragorn, son of Arathorn and Guard voices Frodo Baggins of the Shire.If you like Lord of the Rings, you'll enjoy this adaptation, trust me!

Jawbox5 The Lord of the Rings is viewed as the grandfather of all fantasy literature, so trying to fit such a work into a 2 hour animated piece was always going to be a mighty struggle. If anyone could do it then controversial animator Ralph Bakshi was probably the most able. As a big fan of the original stories I can see that this film has some strong good and bad points. What we get is a film that has its heart in its right place and captures the folklore aspect of the books, but rushes through many important scenes and doesn't have enough time to develop all of the characters.The plot follows Fellowship and the first half of Two Towers quite closely. Hobbit Frodo Baggins receives the one ring that could rule Middle-Earth and sets off on a quest to destroy it before the powers of darkness can claim it. As a result of the films length many important parts of the book are condensed or done away with completely. While it is done with good intentions and to keep the core structure in place, we learn little about the characters and that keeps you at arm's length for most of the film. In the Jackson films I cared about the characters despite the epic story, but here I couldn't care less what happens to most of them.The animation is a mixed bag. The traditional animation looks pretty good and captures the tone of the books almost perfectly. However a lot of the other animation, especially in the action scenes, is rotoscoped which is very odd looking. Its live-action with animation over the top of it and it results in everything looking extremely grainy even though it allows for more fluidity. Throughout the film they both overlap each other and it is extremely obvious when that happens which is distracting. The background paintings are all excellent and expand the world well, whilst many of the places look like you would have imagined them to which is nice.As I alluded to the characters are very much a mixed bag. On one hand I do like Frodo, they make him very charming and thoughtful which makes it easy to sympathise with him. Aragorn is excellently done, even though he looks like a Native American, he has a commanding presence and John Hurt does a wonderful job voicing him. Merry and Pippin are much subtler here which I like compared to Jackson's jokey take. Boromir is also interestingly done and is conflicted character is played up smartly here. Gollum is done fine too and they get the split personality down well, whilst Legolas and Gimli are both good even though they aren't give much time to get an insight into their characters.However Sam is terrible in this. He is just a bumbling idiot and there is no way he'd be allowed to go with the fellowship. Gandalf is also a bit over-the-top too, his powers aren't really looked into and they play up his confused side more than needed. Saruman is very dull and again we don't get an insight into his abilities. The other supporting characters aren't very interesting either and though it is entirely understandable that time be spent on the main characters it is a shame seeing as a lot of the side characters are very enjoyable.The action sequences are where the film truly shines. Every sword or arrow that connects looks and sounds like it hurts, taking a more traditionally brutal approach which works perfectly. The top notch sound effects and the occasional splatter of blood give a real weight to many of the violent moments in the film. The many battles with the Orcs are always given a strong feeling of tension and intensity which draws you in. The climactic battle at Helms Depp drags on a little bit yet it fits as the positive ending the film wants and the battles with in Moria do have a real sense of danger to them, even if the Balrog looks very daft. Tension is one of the films strongest aspects. There is a real sense that danger is around every corner and this crafted brilliantly throughout. Any encounter with the Rings Wraiths is fantastic given their creepy design and scenes involving them always carry an eerie atmosphere. The score by Leonard Rosenman is very good. It has the mysterious and epic mixture that fits the fantasy genre well. The main theme is incredibly catchy and is pretty much guaranteed to be stuck in your head. The more atmospheric pieces are great and add a great deal of tension when they are used.On the whole this is an enjoyable and very ambitious attempt at the great fantasy stories. Given the limited time and lack of budget the film was never going to be great or stick that closely to the books, but it is easy to admire it for what it is. The story is condensed well all things considered and there are some enjoyable characters, not to mention the fierce action scenes and score are great as well. Yet some really interesting parts are skipped over, there is very little character development and the animation is varies from good to very poor. If you are a fan then this is a good version to check out and has a more grounded feel that will appeal to some. It would have been interesting to see Ralph Bakshi do The Return of the Kings and it's a shame we never did.

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

Bill Slocum It's not fair at all to dismiss Ralph Bakshi's animated treatment of "Lord Of The Rings" for being what it's not, the three-part, 11- plus-hour version we got 25 years later. You have to judge it on its own terms. So let's do that.On its own terms, "Lord Of The Rings" is a somewhat goopy, occasionally gripping screen handling of the first book and most of the second book from the J. R. R. Tolkien fantasy epic. In it, hobbit Frodo Baggins finds himself the possessor of a powerful magic ring, the key to defeating the growing forces of darkness. Yet the ring can't be used by Frodo in any constructive way. To be of use to him and his good allies, it must be taken to the heart of the enemy, Mordor, and there destroyed."It is altogether evil," Frodo is warned by his wizard friend, Gandalf. "It will corrupt and destroy anyone who wears it, until he passes into the world of shadows under the power of Sauron, the Dark Lord of Mordor."Bakshi was an animator of powerful and unique vision, yet there are too many occasions where marrying that vision to Tolkien's story seems to have been too much. Frodo and his fellow hobbits are too cutely designed in animated form, with their big eyes, moptop haircuts, and tendency to cower in each other arms as their trek grows more perilous. The animation relies heavily on rotoscoping, basically filming real actors and then sketching over them. Bringing this off in concert with more fully animated sequences creates a lot of lulls in the action.For an animated film, it sounds great anyway. Leonard Rosenman's sterling score builds up suspense and grandeur, and provides majestic payoffs all the way through to a riveting finale. The voice acting is solid, especially John Hurt's work as Aragon, the hobbits' valiant ally. Bakshi introduces him effectively in a barroom sequence that is the film's high point. Unfortunately, that's over thirty minutes in. Peter Woodthorpe oozes corruption as the most Bakshi-type character in the trilogy, Gollum, while William Squire's Gandalf brings Alec Guinness-like authority and humor to his work.Mordor's dark emissaries, the Ring Wraiths, are effectively rendered, so much so their glowing eyes and grey robes seem to have gone to Bakshi's head. Every orc and balrog in Middle Earth sports a similar look.As the film goes on, the problems of bringing off Tolkien's grand design seem to accumulate. The bigness of Tolkien's vision is reduced to a few obvious actors moving in the foreground while matte paintings of others stand stationary around them. Some of these paintings are quite breathtaking, but Bakshi leans on them too much. Big crowd scenes seem to consist of Rosenman's music playing majestically while the screen presents still images broken up by a flapping pennant or waving spear. In battle, the fully animated figures of the main characters mesh awkwardly with the real-life rotoscoped actors around them.There's also the problem of ending the film with half the story yet to occur. Of course, that's not Bakshi's fault; he was given to believe he'd have another movie to tie up these loose ends. His job here was to give us an appetite for that next chapter, and guided by Tolkien's story he almost does. It just doesn't grab one as a unified vision. This is more of a compromise, a noble one, but a bit of a failure all the same.