# Almost no critic' s "Best films of the last decade" lists have any of the LOTR trilogy movies - Why? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [January 7, 2010, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987 "2010-01-07T02:12:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/21 "2010-01-07T18:28:10Z")
> [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](#): > > I don’t really know how you can claim this, when “The Two Towers” has an 8.7 rating at IMDB (#29 of all time) & a 96% positive rating at Rotten Tomatoes. While the book fanboys love to complain about it, \*clearly \*the film appealed to the general public. I wonder how many of the folk who expressed appreciation for TTT had not read the books and had not seen TFotR. I didn’t see the 2d or 3d film in the theater and don’t remember how much of a review of past events they began with. But the director’s cut I watched yesterday started with some old guy in a dress falling into a chasm with some firey monster (and why did it have wings?;)), then cut to 2 little guys walking around in some barren land, and then cut to a group of ugly guys running along carrying 2 other little guys. And then when I got up to speed, it seemed to just end in the middle of a whole bunch of story lines… That’s basically what I was saying. I think the cards are heavily stacked against most sequels or middle films in trilogies to be considered great on their own. ---
**Author:** ![Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eyebrows_0f_doom/32/3119_2.png) [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eyebrows_0f_Doom)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/22 "2010-01-07T18:33:12Z")
No, I understand what you’re saying. TTT is my least favorite of the three. I just don’t think that not reading the book beforehand really made \*that \*much difference to most people in general, since it was such a well-reviewed & popular film. ---
**Author:** ![Ruminator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Ruminator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruminator)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/23 "2010-01-07T18:40:47Z")
> [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](#): > > I also don’t even think the OP is even true. Time Magazine listed the LOTR trilogy as #2 of the decade. Metacritic lists it as the 6th best reviewed film of the decade. Rolling Stone has it as #10. Vanity Fair has it as #8. Entertainment Weekly listed it as #1. There are plenty of places that have LOTR on their Best Of lists. But there are many lists where it isn’t. For example [AFI (American Film Institute’s) 100 Greatest List](http://connect.afi.com/site/DocServer/movies100.pdf?docID=264) doesn’t have any LOTR films. The AFI first 10 of the 100 movies _“selected by AFI’s blue-ribbon panel of more than 1,500 leaders of the American movie community”_ looks like this: [ol] [li]CITIZEN KANE (1941)[/li][li]CASABLANCA (1942)[/li][li]GODFATHER, THE (1972)[/li][li]GONE WITH THE WIND (1939)[/li][li]LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962)[/li][li]WIZARD OF OZ, THE (1939)[/li][li]GRADUATE, THE (1967)[/li][li]ON THE WATERFRONT (1954)[/li][li]SCHINDLER’S LIST (1993)[/li][li]SINGIN’ IN THE RAIN (1952)[/li][/ol] But as I’ve said earlier, notice that key AFI’s key phrase: _“selected by AFI’s blue-ribbon panel of more than 1,500 leaders of the American movie community”_ — when today’s teenagers get older and they themselves become part of the “1,500 leaders of American movie community”, the LOTR will magically start appearing on AFI’s list. It may eventually happen; it just takes 30 years. ---
**Author:** ![Reno\_Nevada](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Reno\_Nevada](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reno_Nevada)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/24 "2010-01-07T18:50:27Z")
> [@Ruminator](#): > > But there are many lists where it isn’t. > > For example [AFI (American Film Institute’s) 100 Greatest List](http://connect.afi.com/site/DocServer/movies100.pdf?docID=264) doesn’t have any LOTR films. > > . That is a list of all-time best movies, not best of the decade–the most recent movie on there is _Fargo_, from 1996, so they don’t think ANY movie from the past decade makes the cut–yet. Both \*Star Wars \*and \*Raiders of the Lost Ark \*are on that list, so it is not limited to pretentious art-house crap, btw. ---
**Author:** ![Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47774/32.png) [@Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sweet_Raisin_Danish)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/25 "2010-01-07T18:59:43Z")
> [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](#): > > Of course. It can’t be that people actually \*liked \*the films. I mean, \*you \*didn’t, therefore everyone who said they did is clearly lying and trying to be cool. :rolleyes: Nice try. I notice that you left out the part of the quote where I admitted it was pure speculation on my part based only on personal observations. This means that I have had personal conversations with a few people about this and was then purely speculating that this could conceivably be one reason why the general public “polls” show higher respect for the LOTR movies than the critics, and/or doesn’t necessarily prove any general “Top Ten” love for the flicks, that’s all. ---
**Author:** ![Ruminator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Ruminator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruminator)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/26 "2010-01-07T19:00:12Z")
> [@Reno\_Nevada](#): > > That is a list of all-time best movies, not best of the decade–the most recent movie on there is _Fargo_, from 1996, so they don’t think ANY movie from the past decade makes the cut–yet. Excactly. Is it because AFI _current members today_ haven’t seen the obviousness of LOTR’s magnificence? Or is it more likely that the _membership_ of AFI hasn’t _evolved_ to include it? ---
**Author:** ![choie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/choie/32/7829_2.png) [@choie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/choie)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/27 "2010-01-07T19:04:09Z")
> [@Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](#): > > No evidence here, just speculation based on personal experience and personal observations/interactions, but I think that these were movies that you were “supposed” to love and appreciate. I mean, they were so epic and such an accomplishment and the cinematography was so great, yadda, yadda. I think a lot of people rate the movie(s) high becuase they feel they’re supposed to and because everyone else is, but they really don’t get it themselves. > > Just a thought … Ah yes, the old “I didn’t like it, so therefore those who _do_ claim to like it are either a) idiots or b) lying just to sound cool / knowledgable / fill in the blank.” Smart people can sincerely love stuff you hate. > [@Dinsdale](#): > > I wonder how many of the folk who expressed appreciation for TTT had not read the books and had not seen TFotR. The plural of anecdote yadda yadda (but that goes for the LOTR-haters too), but I never read any of the books and I freakin’ adored the trilogy. And I’m not a huge fantasy fan, either. TTT and ROTK were my favorites of the trio, too, though it’s a close call. Of course, they would probably be gibberish to anyone who hadn’t seen FOTR, but I can’t imagine there were that many viewers who joined the trilogy at movie #2. > [@](#): > > That’s basically what I was saying. I think the cards are heavily stacked against most sequels or middle films in trilogies to be considered great on their own. Why should they be taken on their own? They’re a trilogy and as a body of work, they’ll probably be taken as a _gestalt_. An exciting, gorgeously filmed, sweeping, touching _gestalt_. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/28 "2010-01-07T19:06:58Z")
> [@Ruminator](#): > > Citizen Kane was not everyone’s Best Film Ever Made when it first came out.. It was, however, considered one of the best films of the year; the original ad campaign for the film strongly stressed how much the critics were raving about it (tagline for one poster: “It’s Terrific!”). But no reviewer is going to call any film one of the best ever made when it first comes out. That always takes time; reviewers can only say what was good or bad about the film as they see it. ---
**Author:** ![Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47774/32.png) [@Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sweet_Raisin_Danish)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/29 "2010-01-07T19:15:49Z")
> [@choie](#): > > Ah yes, the old “I didn’t like it, so therefore those who _do_ claim to like it are either a) idiots or b) lying just to sound cool / knowledgable / fill in the blank.” > > Smart people can sincerely love stuff you hate. So this is two people who took my post wrong, so let me clarify. I was simply giving a purely speculative response to the idea that because imdb and other general public polls had the movie rated higher, therefore the thinking that non-LOTR book readers wouldn’t like it must be wrong. I was trying to point out the general polls can be driven by other factors. I tried to be too cutesy with the post and so my intent was lost. Sorry. > [@](#): > > The plural of anecdote yadda yadda (but that goes for the LOTR-haters too), but I never read any of the books and I freakin’ adored the trilogy. And I’m not a huge fantasy fan, either. TTT and ROTK were my favorites of the trio, too, though it’s a close call. Of course, they would probably be gibberish to anyone who hadn’t seen FOTR, but I can’t imagine there were that many viewers who joined the trilogy at movie #2. This part intrigues me because I have suspected that if you didn’t read the books, you would be completely lost in the movie. It didn’t seem well cut to me from a storytelling standpoint, so I appreciate your perspective here. > [@](#): > > Why should they be taken on their own? They’re a trilogy and as a body of work, they’ll probably be taken as a _gestalt_. An exciting, gorgeously filmed, sweeping, touching _gestalt_. This I agree with which is why I think only the third won Best Picture. The first two didn’t stand well enough on their own because they weren’t supposed to – they weren’t “stories” in and of themselves. The third movie won for all three in essence, because it completed the one long movie/story. (btw, I agree with “gorgeously filmed” and “sweeping”, just not so much with “exciting” and “touching” 🙂 ) ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/30 "2010-01-07T19:27:32Z")
> [@Reno\_Nevada](#): > > Both \*Star Wars \*and \*Raiders of the Lost Ark \*are on that list, so it is not limited to pretentious art-house crap, btw. [QUOTE=Ruminator] The AFI first 10 of the 100 movies “selected by AFI’s blue-ribbon panel of more than 1,500 leaders of the American movie community” looks like this: [ol] [li]CITIZEN KANE (1941) [/li][li]CASABLANCA (1942) [/li][li]GODFATHER, THE (1972) [/li][li]GONE WITH THE WIND (1939) [/li][li]LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962) [/li][li]WIZARD OF OZ, THE (1939) [/li][li]GRADUATE, THE (1967) [/li][li]ON THE WATERFRONT (1954) [/li][li]SCHINDLER’S LIST (1993) [/li][li]SINGIN’ IN THE RAIN (1952)[/li][/ol] [/QUOTE] Which of those 10 movies would you call “pretentious art-house crap,” **Reno Nevada**? I’d say some are overrated, but art house they are most certainly not… ---
**Author:** ![choie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/choie/32/7829_2.png) [@choie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/choie)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/31 "2010-01-07T19:32:00Z")
> [@Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](#): > > So this is two people who took my post wrong, so let me clarify. I was simply giving a purely speculative response to the idea that because imdb and other general public polls had the movie rated higher, therefore the thinking that non-LOTR book readers wouldn’t like it must be wrong. I was trying to point out the general polls can be driven by other factors. I tried to be too cutesy with the post and so my intent was lost. Sorry. Pas de probleme, and thanks! The argument I was seeing in your post (erroneously, apparently) is an all-too-common one that really gets on my wick, so I’m glad I was wrong about your point. > [@](#): > > This part intrigues me because I have suspected that if you didn’t read the books, you would be completely lost in the movie. It didn’t seem well cut to me from a storytelling standpoint, so I appreciate your perspective here. I was a _little_ unclear on certain points (as you can tell from the 500-post thread about my experiences as an LOTR virgin watching the films for the first time) but I think mostly it was from poor hearing on my part. It wasn’t enough to keep me from really really enjoying the hell out of the first film, so much so that I hurried onward to the second and third. In fairness to **Dinsdale** ’s point about understanding TTT after not having seen FOTR in a while, my experiences were with DVDs, which I rented fairly quickly (within a couple of weeks of one another). Whether I’d have understood or remembered what was going on in TTT if I’d actually had to wait a couple of years, I dunno. I think I would have, but I can’t honestly say for sure. Still, apparently enough people were still enamored of TTT that they went back for ROTK. > [@](#): > > (btw, I agree with “gorgeously filmed” and “sweeping”, just not so much with “exciting” and “touching” 🙂 ) Not exciting? Really? Wow. I admit I’m not a big action-movie-goer, but the Battle of Helm’s Deep (TTT) and the, oh crap I can’t remember what the official name of the battle was in ROTK but the one with the Oliphants, were two of the most exciting action sequences I’ve ever seen. And Sam, Pippin, Eowyn, Boromir, Faramir and especially Frodo’s arcs were highly moving to me. Gosh, how could one not be touched by Pippin’s song as Faramir et al. went into doomed battle? Actually, one of the most moving moments was pretty early on in FOTR, when Frodo volunteered to be Ring-Bearer and Gandalf silently reacted with a combo of affection, fear, resignation, and sorrow. (Damn that moment still gets to me, even just in memory: that one shot of McKellan’s expressive eyes told me almost everything I needed to know about Frodo’s upcoming journey.) But I’m a softie, so there ya go. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47774/32.png) [@Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sweet_Raisin_Danish)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/32 "2010-01-07T19:43:20Z")
> [@choie](#): > > Pas de probleme, and thanks! The argument I was seeing in your post (erroneously, apparently) is an all-too-common one that really gets on my wick, so I’m glad I was wrong about your point. No worries – clearly I fired off the post without thinking thru the wording enough. Happens!!! \ > [@](#): > > Not exciting? Really? Wow. I admit I’m not a big action-movie-goer, but the Battle of Helm’s Deep (TTT) and the, oh crap I can’t remember what the official name of the battle was in ROTK but the one with the Oliphants, were two of the most exciting action sequences I’ve ever seen. > > And Sam, Pippin, Eowyn, Boromir, Faramir and especially Frodo’s arcs were highly moving to me. Gosh, how could one not be touched by Pippin’s song as Faramir et al. went into doomed battle? Actually, one of the most moving moments was pretty early on in FOTR, when Frodo volunteered to be Ring-Bearer and Gandalf reacted with a combo of affection, fear, resignation, and sorrow. (Damn that moment still gets to me, even just in memory: that one shot of McKellan’s expressive eyes told me almost everything I needed to know about Frodo’s upcoming journey.) > > But I’m a softie, so there ya go. 🙂 I’ll admit that some of the battle scenes were well done, but in general the tone of the movie came off as forced rather than touching or even particularly exciting. A lot of it I felt was overacted and so I was like “I know I’m supposed to be moved by this scene because the look on so-and-so’s face is the one the acting teachers show you means anguish, but instead I just want to see more giant rocks smashing the towers…” JMO, of course. I give the movies a A+ for effort, which alone puts them above average for Hollywood. But overall, they do nothing for me and if we’re talking about “all-time greats”, that has to include re-watch-ability, which these don’t have for me, as much as I love the cinematography. My point was that when the awe of the filming and epic-ness of it wears off over time, it’s possible that the movie itself won’t hold up to “Best” lists and I was just offering that speculation as a possible bridge between the general public polls and the critics polls. ---
**Author:** ![Negative\_Lite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ce73a5/32.png) [@Negative\_Lite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Negative_Lite)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/33 "2010-01-07T19:44:48Z")
To add a data point, two very prominent critics, A.O. Scott and Michael Phillips of At the Movies, snubbed the LOTR trilogy in both of their [Best of the Decade lists](http://bventertainment.go.com/tv/buenavista/atm/specials/bestofthedecade/index.html). Interestingly, [when they discuss films that didn’t quite make the top ten](http://bventertainment.go.com/tv/buenavista/atm/web_exclusives.html), they talk about Pan’s Labyrinth, Cache, Capote and Borat, but don’t even mention LOTR. I think the reason why LOTR isn’t making all the top ten lists is obvious: critics aren’t doing their jobs if they tell you what _your_ favorite films are. Why should they lie and pretend to have been more enthused about these films than they really are? And I’d be disapponted if a critic had the same shitty taste in films as I do - I expect a critic to try to educate me a little on under-served films and different types of films than I’d normally watch. Why else read a top ten list? ---
**Author:** ![Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eyebrows_0f_doom/32/3119_2.png) [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eyebrows_0f_Doom)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/34 "2010-01-07T21:54:25Z")
> [@Ruminator](#): > > > [@Reno Nevada](#): > > > > That is a list of all-time best movies, not best of the decade–the most recent movie on there is Fargo, from 1996, so they don’t think ANY movie from the past decade makes the cut–yet. > > Excactly. Is it because AFI _current members today_ haven’t seen the obviousness of LOTR’s magnificence? Or is it more likely that the _membership_ of AFI hasn’t _evolved_ to include it? None of those reasons are correct. It’s because that is the list that was created in 1998 for the AFI 100 Years 100 Movies CBS special. The updated list, released in 2007 \*\*does \*\*include “The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring” at #50. So, yes, LOTR is on the AFI _all time_ best movies list. They also have it as their #2 fantasy film of all time. ---
**Author:** ![Ruminator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Ruminator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruminator)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/35 "2010-01-07T22:07:58Z")
> [@Eyebrows\_0f\_Doom](#): > > None of those reasons are correct. It’s because that is the list that was created in 1998 for the AFI 100 Years 100 Movies CBS special. The updated list, released in 2007 \*\*does \*\*include “The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring” at #50. So, yes, LOTR is on the AFI _all time_ best movies list. They also have it as their #2 fantasy film of all time. I thought the list I linked was 2005. Anyways, if fans are looking for LOTR to crack the AFI top-10 (not just top 100), just wait 30 years for today’s 12-year olds to dominate media discourse. It just takes time. ---
**Author:** ![Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47774/32.png) [@Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sweet_Raisin_Danish)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/36 "2010-01-07T22:16:03Z")
> [@Ruminator](#): > > I thought the list I linked was 2005. > > Anyways, if fans are looking for LOTR to crack the AFI top-10 (not just top 100), just wait 30 years for today’s 12-year olds to dominate media discourse. It just takes time. I still don’t get what you’re saying here. Are you saying that because todays 12-year olds think these movies are awesome, that when they become adults and are in charge of the lists, they will add these movies, remembering how much they dug them when they were 12? If that were the case, then the entire list would always be dominated by movies that appealed to 12 year olds, only 30 years hence, which is certainly not the case. Or are you just saying that it takes time for movies to reach a stature of “Top ten ever” in anyone’s eyes? ---
**Author:** ![Ruminator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Ruminator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruminator)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/37 "2010-01-07T22:25:23Z")
> [@Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](#): > > Are you saying that because todays 12-year olds think these movies are awesome, that when they become adults and are in charge of the lists, they will add these movies, remembering how much they dug them when they were 12? I don’t think they will equate them with being 12 at all. That’s the magic of it. They just think the movie is wonderful period; it would be beyond human to admit the magic of the movie has something to do with being an impressionable teenager. > [@](#): > > If that were the case, then the entire list would always be dominated by movies that appealed to 12 year olds, only 30 years hence, which is certainly not the case. Well, don’t you find it strange that the top100 list is not equally distributed across all years or at least all decades? It is heavily skewed towards older movies. And the pont is that it’s skewed that way _today_ – tomorrow’s, and next year’s, and next century’s list will look different with more new movies and less old ones. ---
**Author:** ![davekhps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@davekhps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davekhps)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/38 "2010-01-07T22:25:30Z")
Just came in here to mention that I’m an outlier: The Twin Towers is my favorite one of the trilogy. Now, I hadn’t read the books beforehand (did later on), but I did see Fellowship before TTT. Honestly, I was underwhelmed by Fellowship, largely because its ending is so abrupt and flat in isolation. When you don’t know what’s coming next, it didn’t really leave me wanting more. That said, after I saw TTT, I appreciated Fellowship FAR more than I first did, and now I actually quite like both. Fellowship still meanders, but TTT is more meaningful-- and I still feel that TTT is the most efficient and propulsive of the trilogy. Shit _actually happens_ throughout the whole film. Plus Helm’s Deep is the best action sequence in the trilogy 🙂 Return of the King, alas, struck me as a mess then, and even more so today. Not only the multiple endings dig-- although that dig is entirely justifiable, the film never knew when to stop. No, it’s just too loud, too flashy, full of “stuff”. The characters stop being interesting and overstay their welcome, IMO. I still feel that ROTK’s Oscar win was a prize for the accomplishments of the trilogy as a whole, but I don’t think anyone would have argued it was a “Best Picture” quality film had the previous two installments not set it up so well. BUT… Jackson deserved an Oscar for the accomplishment of the trilogy, I agree there. As for hindsight… effects movies rarely age well (I can’t imagine Avatar will hold up in a year, let alone a decade, once other movies approach and surpass its technical achievements), so we’re left with the core elements of the movie: plot, characters, writing. In hindsight, the LOTR movies don’t appear as strong to me today as they did then. ---
**Author:** ![Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e47774/32.png) [@Sweet\_Raisin\_Danish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sweet_Raisin_Danish)\ **Post date:** [January 7, 2010, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/39 "2010-01-07T22:38:25Z")
> [@Ruminator](#): > > I don’t think they will equate them with being 12 at all. That’s the magic of it. They just think the movie is wonderful period; it would be beyond human to admit the magic of the movie has something to do with being an impressionable teenager. > > Well, don’t you find it strange that the top100 list is not equally distributed across all years or at least all decades? It is heavily skewed towards older movies. And the pont is that it’s skewed that way _today_ – tomorrow’s, and next year’s, and next century’s list will look different with more new movies and less old ones. Hmmmm … I do agree that older movies are favored, but not because those are movies that the list-makers liked when they were 12. I think older movies are favored because in order to make the list, the adults value movies that have stood the test of time and are also considered great movies now. Look at the current Top Ten – only WIzard of Oz and Singin in the Rain would appeal to 12 year olds. The others were likely not even seen by most until adulthood. But these movies make the Top Ten because they have stood the test of time and have held up favorably to movies that were made after. Maybe we’re not saying things too differently – I just don’t see how 12 year olds liking a movie now will have any bearing on it making a list 30 years from now. If it did, then I’d expect the Top 100 to always be filled with 12-year-old friendly movies and it is anything but, for the most part. I think plenty of adults think the LOTR movies are wonderful now, too, but are adult enough to realize that they have to let time pass to see if the movies hold up to scrutiny and comparison and re-watch-ability over the long term. Otherwise, the Top 100 would be greatly skewed towards newer movies and turnover much more frequently. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2010, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987/40 "2010-01-08T01:55:47Z")
> [@davekhps](#): > > Just came in here to mention that I’m an outlier: The Twin Towers is my favorite one of the trilogy. > . I also think Two Towers is the best, but only the extended edition. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/almost-no-critic-s-best-films-of-the-last-decade-lists-have-any-of-the-lotr-trilogy-movies-why/523987.md?page=3)