Box office The Return of the King earned $377 million in the United States and Canada and $741.9 million in other countries for a worldwide total of $1.118 billion in its initial release. In the weekend of 20–22 February 2004, the film crossed the $1 billion mark, making it the second film in history to do so, after
Titanic in 1998. Worldwide, it is the
27th highest-grossing film of all time when not adjusted for inflation, the
highest-grossing film of 2003, the
second highest-grossing film of the 2000s, the highest-grossing entry in
The Lord of the Rings trilogy, and the highest-grossing film ever to be released by
New Line Cinema. It held the record as
Time Warners highest-grossing film worldwide for eight years until it was surpassed by
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2 in 2011.
Box Office Mojo estimates that the film had sold over 61 million tickets in the US in its initial theatrical run. In the US and Canada, it is the 27th highest-grossing film, the highest-grossing 2003 film, and the highest-grossing entry in
The Lord of the Rings trilogy. This record was first surpassed by
Spider-Man 2 in 2004 and ranks as the seventh largest Wednesday opening. Additionally, it was ranked as the highest December opening day, holding that record for less than a decade before getting dethroned by
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey in 2012. The film opened a day earlier for a midnight showing and accounted for about $8 million. This was nearly twice the first-day total of
The Fellowship of the Ring — which earned $18.2 million on its opening day in 2001 — as well as a significant increase over
The Two Towers — which earned $26.1 million on its debut in 2002. Part of the grosses came from the Trilogy Tuesday event, in which the Extended Editions of the two previous films were played on 16 December before the first midnight screening. For two years,
The Return of the King would hold the record for having the highest midnight screenings gross until 2005 when it was given to
Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith. The film went on to make an opening weekend of $72.6 million making it the second-highest opening weekend for a New Line Cinema film, behind
Austin Powers in Goldmember. In addition, it had the third largest opening weekend of that year, after
The Matrix Reloaded and
X2. With a total gross of $125.1 million, the film had the biggest five-day Wednesday opening of all time, surpassing the previous record held by
Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace. The next year, this record would be beaten by
Shrek 2. Its Friday-Sunday opening weekend was a record-high for December (first surpassed by
I Am Legend). The film also set single-day records for Christmas Day and New Year's Day (both first surpassed by
Meet the Fockers). Outside the US and Canada, it is the 17th highest-grossing film, the highest-grossing 2003 film and the highest-grossing film of the series. In New Zealand, where filming took place, the film set opening day, opening weekend, single-day, Friday gross, Saturday gross and Sunday gross records with $1.7 million in four days. Following subsequent reissues, the film has grossed $387 million in the United States and Canada and $761 million in the rest of the world for a worldwide total of $1.148 billion. that the gross income from non-box office sales and merchandise has been at least equal to the box office for all three films. If this is so, the total gross income for the trilogy would be in the region of $6 billion following an investment of $300 million ($426 million including marketing costs).
Critical response On the
review aggregator website
Rotten Tomatoes,
The Return of the King holds an approval rating of 94% based on 304 reviews. The website's critics consensus reads, "Visually breathtaking and emotionally powerful,
The Lord of the Rings – The Return of the King is a moving and satisfying conclusion to a great trilogy."
Metacritic, which uses a
weighted average, gives the film a score of 94 out of 100 based on 41 reviews, indicating "universal acclaim". Audiences polled by
CinemaScore gave the film a rare average grade of "A+" on an A+ to F scale, the highest grade in the trilogy. Alan Morrison of
Empire gave the film a perfect score of five stars. In his review, he called the film "the resounding climax to a landmark in cinema history" and praised how Peter Jackson had "kept the momentum of the series rolling on and on through the traditionally 'difficult' middle part and 'weak' finale, delivering a climax to the story that's neater and more affecting than what Tolkien managed on the printed page." Morrison also mentioned how fans of the films "who have walked beside these heroes every step of the way on such a long journey deserve the emotional pay-off as well as the action peaks, and they will be genuinely touched as the final credits roll."
Elvis Mitchell for
The New York Times lauded the acting, the craft of the technical crew, and Jackson's direction, describing
The Return of the King as "a meticulous and prodigious vision made by a director who was not hamstrung by heavy use of computer special-effects imagery."
Roger Ebert of the
Chicago Sun-Times gave the film three and a half stars out of four, saying that it is "such a crowning achievement, such a visionary use of all the tools of special effects, such a pure spectacle, that it can be enjoyed even by those who have not seen the first two films." Talking about the whole trilogy, Ebert said that he admired it "more as a whole than in its parts", and that
The Return of the King certified
The Lord of the Rings as "a work of bold ambition in a time of cinematic timidity". In his review for
The Times, James Christopher praised
The Return of the King as "everything a Ring fan could possibly wish for, and much more", and described
The Lord of the Rings as "the greatest film trilogy ever mounted, with some of the most amazing action sequences committed to celluloid". Nev Pierce for the
BBC gave the film five stars out of five, judging it to be the best chapter of the trilogy, since it combined "the 'ooh' factor of
Fellowship with the zippy action of
Towers". Pierce described
The Return of the King as "Majestic, moving, and immense", and "an astonishing piece of storytelling".
Philip French, reviewing it for
The Observer, lauded the narrative force, the battle scenes, the language, and the visual style of the film, which he related to "the swirling battle paintings of
Albrecht Altdorfer" and "
Claude Lorrain's elegiac paintings of maritime departures inspired by classical poets." French wrote about the whole trilogy "Jackson's
Lord of the Rings is indeed a very fine achievement, moving, involving and, to many people, even inspiring. It redeems the debased cinematic notion of the epic." In her review for
Entertainment Weekly,
Lisa Schwarzbaum gave the film an A grade, and wrote "The conclusion of Peter Jackson's masterwork is passionate and literate, detailed and expansive, and it's conceived with a risk-taking flair for old-fashioned movie magic at its most precious ... as he has done throughout, the director paces scenes of action, intimacy, and even panoramic, geographical grandeur ... with the control of a superb choreographer." Schwarzbaum also said of the whole series "I can't think of another film trilogy that ends in such glory, or another monumental work of sustained storytelling that surges ahead with so much inventiveness and ardor."
Richard Corliss of
Time named
The Return of the King the best film of the year and described the whole trilogy as "The film event of the millennium".
Joe Morgenstern, for
The Wall Street Journal, wrote "Never has a filmmaker aimed higher, or achieved more. The third and last instalment of the screen epic based on J.R.R. Tolkien's literary classic redefines – steeply upward – the very notion of a major motion picture."
Peter Bradshaw, who had been less enthusiastic about the first two chapters of the trilogy, gave
The Return of the King four stars out of five in his review for
The Guardian, commenting "I started the series an atheist and finished an agnostic". Bradshaw wrote of the film "Technically it really is superb", and commented "Hours after watching the film, I can close my eyes and see those incredible battle scenes pulsing and throbbing in my skull ... Maybe
Kurosawa's battles will one day be described as proto-Jacksonian". Some critics had negative opinions of the film. Tom Charity observes in
Time Out, "Some story strands are crudely abbreviated; others fail to develop elements that were already well-established. Given the inordinate running time, it's hard to avoid the feeling that we've already been here, done this." Jonathan Romney noted in
The Independent, "[T]here's something not quite palatable about all these intrepid, largely beautiful Europeans boldly fending off the nameless, numberless hordes from the other side of the world, legions of dark-skinned sans-culottes with tribal drums. ... Aside from this, there's plenty to be offended by on an aesthetic level: the film's self-important solemnity, its hyperbolic over-insistence. ... [T]here are no empty spaces, no gaps for thought, no real stimulus to the viewer's imagination. The film has no idea when to stop, either, with its multiple codas and final dying fall into beatific cosiness." And Antonia Quirke in the
Evening Standard opined, "Viggo Mortensen's Aragorn is the good king of the title, and while the actor may look fetching in a crown and cloak, he doesn't have half of the gravitas of Sean Bean's Boromir in the first film. Director Peter Jackson has been all but deified for his work on this particular ring cycle, but there is not much personality behind the camera here, merely rampant enthusiasm." The most common criticism of
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King was its running time, particularly the epilogue; even rave reviews for the film commented on its length.
Joel Siegel of
Good Morning America said in his review for the film (which he gave an 'A'): "If it didn't take forty-five minutes to end, it'd be my best picture of the year. As it is, it's just one of the great achievements in film history." In February 2004, a few months following release, the film was voted eighth on
Empires
100 Greatest Movies of All Time, compiled from readers' top ten lists. This forced the magazine to abandon its policy of only allowing films being older than a year to be eligible. In 2007,
Total Film named
The Return of the King the third best film of the past decade (
Total Films publication time), behind
The Matrix and
Fight Club. In July 2025, it ranked number 15 on the "Readers' Choice" edition of
The New York Times list of "The 100 Best Movies of the 21st Century."
Accolades The film was nominated for eleven
Academy Awards:
Best Picture,
Best Director,
Best Adapted Screenplay,
Best Original Score,
Best Original Song,
Best Visual Effects,
Best Art Direction,
Best Costume Design,
Best Make-up,
Best Sound Mixing and
Best Film Editing. At the
76th Academy Awards in 2004, the film won all the categories for which it was nominated and it shares the record for highest Academy Award totals along with
Titanic (which also starred Bernard Hill) and
Ben-Hur, and holding the record for the highest clean sweep at the Oscars, surpassing the nine awards earned by both
Gigi and
The Last Emperor. It was the first fantasy film to win the Academy Award for Best Picture. It also was the last movie for 14 years to win the Academy Award for Best Picture without being chosen as one of the top ten films of the year by the
National Board of Review, until the release of
The Shape of Water in 2017. The film won four
Golden Globes (including Best Picture for Drama and Best Director), five
BAFTAs, two
MTV Movie Awards, two
Grammy Awards, nine
Saturn Awards, the
New York Film Critics Circle award for Best Picture, the
Nebula Award for Best Script, and the
Hugo Award for Best Dramatic Presentation, Long Form. == See also ==