> As for the remainder of
> the original post, I really have little to say, given that it is the most
> common criticism I've seen among critics; not enough action, too long, and
> (although it wasn't used in this instance) believe it or not, not enough
> sex (astonished gasps all around and a lady faints in the background).
> Critics today are much too jaded.

Ummmm...... 'not enough action' obviously implies that there was SOME, so what would 'not enough sex' imply? Hmmmmmm.

I seem to remember there being absolutely NO SEX in any of the three (and I just watched them again weeks ago). It would have been superlatively, incredibly, astonishingly disgraceful to Tolkien, the books, and their fans if that were the case!

Is that REALLY what the critics said? Maybe there was an alternate version to slightly appease the jaded critics (J/K)? LOL!