login / register
impeachment (President is engaged in a “cover up”) w/out giving him a sound bite w/the word …
Welcome to Ubersite!

Donovan's Lord of the Rings Review

Submitted by ryandonovan at 2002-01-25 00:54:26 EST
Rating: 0.75 on 40 ratings (40 reviews) (Review this item) (V)


Rating: 4.0 out of 5

Starring: Elijah Wood, Ian McKellan, Viggo Mortensen
Directed By: Peter Jackson
Written By: Philippa Boyens, Peter Jackson, Frances Walsh

Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. Dramatic tale of good and evil. Legendary fantasy. Epic adventure. Fearless heroes. Vivid beauty. Sweeping landscapes. Mind-blowing visuals. Valliant battles. Subverted homosexuality.

Say what you want about the movie. But what you can’t say is that it was about heterosexuals. Not that the film’s sexual orientation took away from its quality or anything. It was still a gripping adventure and a visual masterpiece. But anyone who thinks Frodo wasn’t taking punches in the pants is kidding himself.

Just look at the subtext. I’ll grant you, very little of the homosexuality was out in the open. But look a little closer and you’ll find gayness aplenty. Let’s start with the hobbits. These hedonistic creatures were as close to openly gay as the movie gets. They were into frolicking and prancing and group sex. They were always hiding in the bushes together and giggling. They gathered in the Shire to sing, dance, and play games like White Cracker and Elephant Walk. The hobbit birthday party scene was like Sunday night at Manhole. And you know what they say about hairy feet.

Then there’s Gandalf the Pervy. He was nothing but a creepy old man who delighted in leering at the little barefoot hobbit boys. In a modern tale, he’d be waiting by the playground in a van with tinted windows. The hobbits shrieked excitedly when Gandalf came to town, begging him to “do some magic tricks” and to show them his “firecracker”. Gandalf had a very questionable relationship with his walking stick, which he referred to as his “third leg”. When he was not gripping it, he was letting the hobbits rub it for good luck.

The elves (a.k.a. fairies) were another group of folks whose homosexuality was not deeply suppressed. These well-manicured, ivory-skinned, phallic-eared, snappily-dressed beings were way too vain to be straight. They all lived and bathed together in a chubby-friendly commune. Just off-screen, they were waxing their thighs, watching old Tony Curtis movies, and drinking each other’s semen. Plus, they all lived with Cate Blanchett, yet nobody was boning her. Gay.

The humans, not surprisingly, were the most latent homosexuals of all Middle-earth. These overly-rugged, overly-butch, overly-warring homophobes spent every frame trying desperately to prove their masculinity to everyone. Yet inside, they were yearning to be touched like the handle of a broadsword. They wielded their weapons like extensions of their manhood, poking and prodding and fighting everything in sight. Unable to deal with their desire for homosex in a healthy way, they let their dormant sexuality build up into a feverish frenzy. Raised by intolerant fathers, their only outlet was violence, taking out their aggression from the safety of their closets.

What else? The One Ring, too big to fit Frodo’s finger, was clearly a cock ring. Since the ring had so many previous bearers, nobody wanted to touch it, for fear of disease. The uruk-hai creatures were formed by mating orcs with humans. Yet curiously, there were no female orcs or humans around. The only answer is gay male sex. The title, “The Fellowship of the Ring” is an obvious reference to a circle jerk. Finally, big bad villain Sauron was represented as a giant diabolical glowing red clitoris. It was the film’s not-so-subtle way of stating that women are evil. The only real heterosexual in the movie was Gimli, the manly dwarf. However, he had other issues to deal with. He was forced to overcompensate for his tiny dwarfish penis with his gigantic battle axe.

Well, if you can take your one-track minds out of Boys Town for just a moment, we can examine other aspects of the film. If you’re a J.R.R. Tolkien fan, this movie will make you cream your cheese. Visually speaking, it is a work of art. It’s a feast for the eye, every frame superb and stunning. I commend the relatively inexperienced Peter Jackson for his vision and his perfectionism (speaking of Jackson, he’s no stranger to implied homosexuality; see his film Heavenly Creatures for a blatant example of quiescent lesbianism). The film itself was very good, but predictably, over-hyped. As a stand-alone movie, the story struggled. Bound by the book, the story ended at a very forced and awkward place. The script ignored one of the first rules of screenwriting: Time Frame. For the viewer, there was little sense of urgency or deadline, and we didn’t know when to expect a climax (because there wasn’t one). But as a trilogy, I’m sure this film will fit remarkably, and the entire series will be fantastic. It does not deserve an Oscar nomination for Best Picture, however, even in this extremely weak year. It got a Golden Globe nomination, sure, because the Foreign Press is easily wowed by Horse And Pony Shows. I will admit, though, Jackson deserves a Best Director nomination for wrapping his arms around this behemoth. The movie was unwaveringly true to the book. Even toker Tolkien’s drug references (smoking weeds, eating mushrooms, hobbits with the munchies) were included. The only disappointing portion exorcised from the book was the chapter where the hobbits cavort and romp in the Field of Buttplugs.

The acting was not remarkable, but it was at the very least adequate. Elijah Wood, Ian McKellan, Ian Holm, and Cate Blanchett all did well in their roles. Sean Astin, as the hobbit that ate Rudy, turned in his best work since Encino Man. Hugo Weaving, in the role of… well, I’m not sure, because I couldn’t mentally remove him from The Matrix. He was good in The Matrix, though. And Viggo Mortensen, the most expendable actor on the planet, as cowardly Aragorn the Pussy, was pitiful. In a recent ‘In Style’ magazine article, Mortensen admitted to rubbing cat urine on his face daily, to help cleanse his pores and give his skin a youthful glow.

Despite how enjoyable the film was, make no mistake, Lord of the Rings is inferior to Star Wars. Anyone who tells you differently is a heretic and a dope fiend. Moreover, Rings has not had nearly as big an impact on popular culture as people claim… unless you count Leonard Nimoy’s music career and your geeky older brother’s bookshelf as major pieces of pop culture.

Do I recommend this movie? Sure, I do. And it’s well worth seeing on the big screen. I can only hope that the sequels provide a more complete story. And that the next films are proud of their homosexuality. They should not be as ashamed as The Fellowship of the Ring, which masks its sexuality the way a gimp masks his facial scars. The next films would only profit from being outed; you can’t deny that uptight Saruman would benefit from an assful of fist. You don’t think the next film will be a queer one as well? The title is “The Two Towers”…

Review This Item




Submitted by Random Joe at 2004-09-19 14:15:03 EDT (#)
Rating: 2

brilliant, you are brilliant!

Submitted by Degreeless_Capibara at 2004-05-07 13:22:54 EDT (#)
Rating: 2

Please come back to us.


Submitted by Random Joe at 2004-05-07 13:19:39 EDT (#)
Rating: 2

Ha ha, that review was the shit. I laughed my ass off.

Submitted by shandythedog at 2004-04-26 09:03:13 EDT (#)
Rating: 2

this bit is good though:

In a recent 'In Style' magazine article, Mortensen admitted to rubbing cat urine on his face daily, to help cleanse his pores and give his skin a youthful glow.

Submitted by shandythedog at 2004-04-26 09:00:49 EDT (#)
Rating: 0

the things that struck me most about it (and i did't see all of it because the dope wore off before the end):

-all the BLATANT drug references (hobbit weed, mushrooms etc)

-the theme of friendship

-the theme of power corrupting

-the magificent white horsie that raced to safety at some point

i assume all your homosexual talk is tongue in cheek (so to speak)but it's a bit of a bore really and i think belittles the friendship aspect. i found one of the opening scenes, where gandalf turns up in his cart and frodo leaps into his arms with such unabashed joy and love, very moving and uplifting.

in general, i found the everyday life of the hobbits more interesting than the special effects battle with monsters stuff.

having said all that, a bit more tits and arse might have been a good thing, if done artistically. soft core porn in the 'sex and zen' vein, perhaps.

Submitted by Random Joe at 2004-03-05 05:55:29 EST (#)
Rating: -2

Your're just a anormal someone who watchs movies again and again so you can come up with a way to make it seem gay. I think maybe that you are gay and you just don't know it yet.You bash gay people in that it convinces you that you aren't gay. Before you write another review on Lord Of the Rings you should do a little research and try to write like normal people. If you are gay see your-self like it and leave the others that aren't alone. Respect is beutiful you dumb (dunk) analphabet.

Submitted by esso_merda at 2004-01-13 04:47:46 EST (#)
Rating: 2

No, seriously, I loved the movie (and the subsequent sequels), yet this review is better than any I've read. What's up with Frodo and Sam? Heiney hobbits?

Submitted by esso_merda at 2004-01-13 04:46:03 EST (#)
Rating: 2

I don't know why this got brought back, but one big fucking (+2) for donovan. Holy shit this was hilarious!

Submitted by Random Joe at 2004-01-13 04:09:22 EST (#)
Rating: 1

no, this is for the pre-previous gentleman


Submitted by Random Joe at 2004-01-01 03:41:34 EST (#)
Rating: 1

This is for the previous reviewer.


Submitted by Random Joe at 2003-12-29 15:44:30 EST (#)
Rating: -2

no matrter what people always have to say that it is eather bad, or gay becuase no matter what critics always have to bring things down and there is always a reason that something is wrong with it!!! well let me tell u sumthin u fag!! THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH LOTR!!! AND U R GAY
just bcuz they dont want there friends to die and they have been best friends for life like merry and pippen then that doesnt mean they are gay!!! and dont even say that frodo and sam are cus in case u havent noticed SAM GETS MARRIED!!! U ASS FACES SAO GO SUCK IT NONE OF U NO NOTHING ABOUT LOTR U PROBABLY HAVENT EVEN READ THE BOOKS SO DONT CRITISIZE SOMTHING U DONT NO WHAT U ARE TALKING ABOU ASS HOLES!!!!

Submitted by JinkyWilliams at 2003-12-12 14:04:58 EST (#)
Rating: 0


I'd bet dollars to pesos that Mr. Donovan's LoTR review is as serious as his "You're a racist, Dr. Seuss" post. He does a great job of twisting and contorting context to display any point of view he pleases, regardless of what he actually believes.

He has a track history of shenanigans(sp?), and I'd like to think anyone who's read his Dr Seuss article could see it for what it is.

On a related note, didn't Dr Oxford compose something similar? Dr Oxford is great.

Stay orange.

Submitted by Random Joe at 2003-12-12 13:47:29 EST (#)
Rating: -2

You have to be the most idiotic S.O.B. I have ever encountered. You bash Lord of The Rings and say is is nothing but a circle jerk? Maybe you should get a life and find something better to do than to watch movies over and over so you can come up with a way to make it seem gay. I think maybe that you are gay and you just don't know it yet. You bash gay people in that it convinces you that you aren't gay. Before you write another review on Lord Of the Rings you should do a little research. Here is a helpful start. Many people think that this movie is written from the book's "The Hobbit" and so forth but actually this entire story was coined from a 19th centruy opera. Can't exactly remember the name of it right now but maybe you should go back and bash some of the greatest artist of the 1800's. Sincerely, Inferrior To you.....

Submitted by Random Joe at 2003-10-17 18:12:55 EDT (#)
Rating: 2

ok...this is the last time

Submitted by Random Joe at 2003-10-17 18:12:10 EDT (#)
Rating: 2

why not again?

Submitted by Random Joe at 2003-10-17 18:09:32 EDT (#)
Rating: 2

i'm sorry, i had to rate this grade A review again.

Submitted by Random Joe at 2003-10-17 18:06:34 EDT (#)
Rating: 2

holy shit you are totally right! i missed these blatant acts of gayness the first and second time, but when i watched it the third...

Submitted by Agent_FUBAR at 2003-06-02 11:13:31 EDT (#)
Rating: 0

The book is pompous and overbearing (yes I have read it and it was a fucking hardship, I usually enjoy reading but not this crap) and the film, while beutifully shot, the acting is abysmal and its to bloody long by half.

Submitted by hidden101 at 2003-03-08 12:14:22 EST (#)
Rating: -2

we are all so anxiously waiting for your next review, Ryan. so what will it be this time; "Big Black Cocks with Pearly White Cum?"

Submitted by hidden101 at 2003-03-08 12:10:49 EST (#)
Rating: -2

ok, i just read this piece of dogshit, since i had 3 hours open in my busy drinking schedule. Ryan Donovan is obviously a dodo-punching fag. after reading this review, i felt about the same as i did the time i went over my handlebars on my bike and smashed my forehead on the pavement. if you notice, the only thing he talks about is the homo inuendo, but still gives it a 4 out of 5. hmmmm.... so what are you trying to tell us, Ryan?

Submitted by hidden101 at 2003-03-08 11:59:41 EST (#)
Rating: 0

i have. it's hilarious. and i agree with him- not enough lesbian mud wrestling, and Lo Pan should have kicked everyone's ass.

Submitted by Istaros at 2003-03-08 03:21:54 EST (#)
Rating: 0

in that case, hidden101, DO read maddox's review of that film. at least. for the good fo humanity.

Submitted by hidden101 at 2003-03-06 18:06:30 EST (#)
Rating: 0

JESUS CHRIST! this review was as long as the goddamn movie! i didn't even read it! i've tried to watch this piece of shit excuse for a movie three times, and fell asleep in the first hour all three times. what a shitty movie...

Submitted by Random Joe at 2003-03-06 17:20:54 EST (#)
Rating: 2

Yeah, don't even get us started on the obvious symbolism of "The Two Towers".

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-12-22 22:15:04 EST (#)
Rating: 2

As for "J", shut up. You're an idiot. You yell at him for being funny. What the hell do you think this site is for you queer? And tell your boy "Luciano" I'm waiting for him. Come break my fucking knees....

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-12-22 22:11:46 EST (#)
Rating: 2

I'll have to congratulate you on this one, Ryan. I read your other review for "How the Grinch Stole Christmas" and I wasn't so sure if I liked it. But when I read this one, I realized you were a pretty cool guy. This is real satire. Even if other people don't approve of it, I see it's humor and I think you are really good at this. Keep up the good work. You're a funny guy.

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-02-20 04:35:01 EST (#)
Rating: 1

Whoever you are man, if you are ever at my house, we'll pack one and have a big toke.
But damn, get a guy to give you a BJ already okay? shit. every guy that sees gay male shit in movies is scared of his sexuality.
that movie sucked my big black pulsating cock man, except for some of the special effects- people WANTED DESPERATELY to like it because they liked the books.. wank off geeks!
Damn, I'm probably the only chick who reads this fucking stuff, especially one who isn't socially inept nor ugly. :)
Fuck man, but again, you're fucking funny.
kudos to fucking you.
Is your real name Donovan? Damn, that's a hillbilly name, sorry man.

Oh yeah, and you know the guy from the MATRIX? I first saw him as a flaming drag queen in Priscilla Queen of The Desert- that's all I could think of during Matrix and LOTR. Shit.

Have a super day!


Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-02-08 00:40:34 EST (#)
Rating: 0

My ass.

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-02-02 16:53:21 EST (#)
Rating: -2

gerbil dick

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-02-02 16:51:58 EST (#)
Rating: -2

How'd you like for me to get my boy Luciano to break both your knees smartass? You like that? Yeah you keep it up, I'm laughing over here. I'm laughing my ass off so keep it coming funnyman!

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-01-30 15:21:08 EST (#)
Rating: 2

Oh no! NOOOOO!!!!

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-01-30 09:09:40 EST (#)
Rating: -2

Ouch. Your wit is sharp. Please stop hurting my spirit with your clever retorts.

Although I realize that your wisdom and level of creativity is far greater than my simple woppish mind could ever possibly grasp, I must point out that I was not commenting on the random foe's anonymity, but on his faggotishness and buttholelikeness, and was simply offended by his disrespect. You failed to see this, and tried to make up for the small size of your wang by attempting to make yourself look big, and me look small. Failed mission, my foe, in doing this you have only pointed out to us ALL that you do indeed have a member the size of an infant gerbil's pinky toe.

Nice job wiseass.

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-01-29 20:15:15 EST (#)
Rating: 0

Yeah, like 'j' is not anonymous. OK, call me 'z', no wait, too personal. 'K'! that's better. My name is 'K'

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-01-28 13:51:22 EST (#)
Rating: -2

YOU, my anonymous foe, SUCK ASS!

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-01-28 12:08:29 EST (#)
Rating: 2

j sucks. This was a great article. And ALL movies are gay. Trust me.


Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-01-25 19:30:21 EST (#)
Rating: -2

You suck.
The movie rocked and there was NO gayness whatsoever. That is some kinda sick sexual fantasy that you created in your own mind while you were watching it. Maybe that's what you had to do in order to enjoy it.
If you've read the books, it would actually mean something to you. Then you wouldn't be thinking through your wang.

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-01-25 17:27:00 EST (#)
Rating: 2

In response to 'ME' who reviewed the essay below:

Where do you get that Mr. Donovan is homophobic? There is not one point in his essay where you can say that he was talking badly about the subverted homosexuality of the film.
You assumed he was talking badly about it because you think it is a bad thing that homosexuals are a large portion of the film.

Bascially, you're the homophobe.

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-01-25 16:09:30 EST (#)
Rating: -2

This article has exceptionally stupid made up gay references, i mean like han "solo" wasnt a gay figure head in your beloved starwars, stroking his wookie... or the glowing phallic symbols all the homos run around with in the star wars movie... why are all the jedi's single... obviously they are all gay huh... and what about the millenium flying phallic ship...

Any homophobe can come up with a reason for anything to be "gay", i guess some have more time than others...

Submitted by Random Joe at 2002-01-25 14:31:37 EST (#)
Rating: 2

Diggety Dogg strikes again. Another brilliant analysis to a latently homoerotic film.

How about that white dress thing Frodo was wearing towards the end. Every gay's fantasy, to dress up like a girl and be not only accepted, but special. And doesn't Elijah Wood look like a girl in the first place?

And how about that blue sword that "glows" when those goblins underground were near?
Can't you reasonably argue that the blue sword is a symbol for Frodo's penis, which "grows" when undersexed, uncontrollable maniacs are near?

Lastly, the most blatantly homogay moment is when Samwise throws himself into the river so he can go with his friend. Clearly an act of gay love.
There is no way that any straight man would kill himself to show his loyalty to another friend. If Diggety wants to go fight those A-Rabs in Afghanistan, God Bless. Sucker.
Straight men only kill themselves for women, and that's usually in connection to some type of revenge scheme where the man walks into his lover's office, turns his back to her, and
romantically blows his brains out, spraying his brain matter and blood on her desk, wall, and face.

Nuff said.

Submitted by bart at 2002-01-25 02:21:20 EST (#)
Rating: 2

One obviously homosexual undertone in the movie that was not mentioned in this review is the motivation behind the uruk-hai army. This is an army of dirty freakish creatures working without pay in horrendous conditions in hopes of pleasing their "master", Saruman. He stands atop a towering phallus wearing nothing but a flowing white gown as he watches over the deep analesque caverns in which they slave.

Clearly affected by Gandalf's rejection and a small penis, Saruman overcompensates in an attempt to prove to Gandalf and to himself that he's ready to start baggin a new bilbo.

The only way the homosexuality could have been more blatant is if the half-orcs had put on leather masks, donkey punched Gandalf, and chanted as Saruman exposed the true meaning of the word "Fellowship".

Bart: Oh, cheer up, Mom. You can't buy publicity like that. Thousands
and thousands of people saw your pretzels injuring Whitey Ford.

Homer: You can call them Whitey-whackers!

-- Homer Simpson
The Twisted World of Marge Simpson