Smell this, I think it's expired...

[Ainaserkewen]

It was the first time I'd seen a Lord of the Rings film on regular cable TV. The Fellowship of the Ring was broadcast over two days on Canada's channel so out of loyalty I watched it. I hadn't seen the first movie in a little while.

I noticed something though. I was a movie gal first when it came to Frodo and his ring and I have vivid memories of being in that theatre the first time wishing before it had started that I had gone to see Harry Potter instead. I remember being captivated from the first scene and ending all thought process throughout the movie.

The Fellowship of the Ring, I noticed not being a lover of fantasy movies at the time, was a truly flawless movie. The cutting was beautifully done and the script was seamless and I remember, not cheesy in the slightest. The screenplay was so wonderful that I can remember most of the script as if it were a song I'd learned off the radio.

But you all know how much some people loved the first movie. It didn't win the Big Award, but it was still fresh, clean and exciting.

I remember seeing the next two in much the same fashion. However, I noticed that I wasn't as impressed with them. It came back to me as I was watching Fellowship. The second two have less melodious movement, less flowy language and more awkward moments, some which made me cringe.

So my question to all of you is if you a) agree with me over the "flowy-ness" of the movies, b) think that it's just me in noticing what I do. I did fall madly in love with the Fellowship, so maybe my observations are just in comparison. And c) what could have made the second two less wonderful.

Like the Matrix series, which critics agreed that the first was amazing but the latter were tired and used feeling, do you think that after the first movie, the other two just seem expired?