The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring Review
by Richard A. Zwelling (razwee AT yahoo DOT com)June 12th, 2003
LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING
**** (out of ****)
a film review by
Richard A. Zwelling
Before writing this review, I will freely admit that I have just begun reading J.R.R. Tolkien's highly-lauded Lord of the Rings series, so forgive me if any of my comments seem short-sighted or incomplete. However, as somebody who has seen the first two installments of director Peter Jackson's stunning vision of Tolkien's trilogy without having read the novels, I feel that I can offer perspective on the films' effectiveness in communicating the essentials of the story.
In the past two years, the cinematic market has witnessed an explosion of adaptations based on well-known fantasy series. In addition to the more obvious Tolkien trilogy and J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series, which constituted the top two money makers of 2001, a film version of the best-selling Artemis Fowl will be due out in theaters next year. Also included among projects in the works are screen versions of Ursula K. Le Guin's Earthsea novels and C.S. Lewis's classic Chronicles of Narnia.
While the first Harry Potter film unquestionably secured fantasy as a dominant genre in today's movie market, the standards which Peter Jackson's work has set are considerably higher and are much more indicative of a fantasy film that future entries into the genre will be judged against. I should add that it is hard to imagine any film surpassing the sheer magnificence, visual splendor, and technical mastery that Lord of the Rings displays.
The novel is of epic proportions, a classic battle between good and evil on a massive scale, and Peter Jackson uses every conceivable technique at his disposal to illustrate this. There are grand, sweeping shots over fields, mountains, and rivers, as well as a sizable amount CGI manipulation, but the challenge that Jackson so adeptly rises to is to keep those elements from overwhelming plot and characterization. The CGI is undeniably present, but it never draws excessive attention to itself and is always there to serve the story, not overtake it. In addition to the more large-scale cinematography, Jackson also employs a well-executed mix of closeups, skewed camera angles, two-shots, and pans (shot masterfully by director of photography Andrew Lesnie).
The shooting for all three chapters of the triliogy was done without separation and on location in New Zealand, and the schedule spanned a marathon 15 months. Jackson's original cut for The Fellowship alone approximated four-and-a-half hours in length, and from this, he was forced to produce a three-hour theatrical cut.
This is why I find it amusing that several critics considered the film's 178-minute length to be much too long, because after learning this (and familiarizing myself a bit with the novel), it is clear that the film's pacing is actually extremely fast. Several notable episodes and characters present in the novel are removed for the screen version (most notably, the hobbits' encounter with Tom Bombadil). Quite contrary to these critics' beliefs, I find it amazing that Jackson was able to whittle everything down to 178 minutes and still communicate all that is important to Tolkien's work. After seeing the film, however, I felt that I had no trouble understanding the spirit of the trilogy.
The acting is fantastic with little or no weaknesses in performance quality. The top performance belongs to Ian McKellan, who was robbed of an Oscar for his work in this film. As the grey wizard Gandalf, McKellan displays the perfect mix of world-weariness, loving care, and steadfast authority. Especially poignant are the moments when we witness Gandalf confronting inner (and very soon after, outer) demons. As the hobbit Frodo, Elijah Wood succeeds in gaining our sympathy and drawing us into his character. While Frodo undergoes much more physical and emotional change in The Two Towers, Wood's performance here firmly establishes Frodo as a character the audience will be interested to follow down the road.
The other seven members of the fellowship include Sam (Sean Astin), the hobbit who acts as Frodo's caretaker; two other hobbits named Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd), who act mainly as comic relief; Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), heir to the throne of Gondor, the kingdom of men; Boromir (Sean Bean), also of the race of men; Legolas (Orlando Bloom) the elf; and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) the dwarf. Their quest is to trek across the lands of Middle Earth to the dark land of Mordor. There, they must destroy the One Ring, a talisman forged by the dark lord Sauron and a curse to anyone who falls under its power. Only in Mordor, where the ring was crafted, can the ring also be destroyed, and Frodo must endure the burden of acting as the ringbearer.
The other players include Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm), who happened upon the ring in The Hobbit, the prequel to the trilogy; Arwen (Liv Tyler) the elf and her father Elrond (Hugo Weaving), who rules over the elven land of Rivendell; and Galadriel (Cate Blanchett), the elven Lady of Light who aids the fellowship in the woods of Lothlorien. Each of these performances stands out as strong supporting roles worthy of notice.
There is also the reemergence of character actor Christopher Lee, 80, who perfectly captures the essence of the white wizard Saruman. Being more of a Tolkien fan than any other member involved with the project, Lee related to Peter Jackson that his life-long dream of participating in a film version of the trilogy was finally being realized. Let it also be known that Lee can recite the ring's famous four-line phrase...in the tongue of Mordor.
Perhaps the best thing that can be said about Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring is the way it makes three hours fly by without much notice. It is impossible not to be immersed within Middle Earth once the film gets going and Jackson should receive all the credit he can for transporting the audience and successfully keeping them entranced throughout the film's duration. Depending on how the trilogy turns out as a whole, Lord of the Rings very well could stand out as a monumental achievement in cinematic history.
More on 'The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring'...
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
