The world is changed. I feel it in the water. I feel it in the earth. I smell it in the air. Much that once was, is lost, for none now live who remember it.
A review by Mike Shea Movie Rating: ( * * * * * ) DVD Rating: ( * * * · · )
In 1954 JRR Tolkien defined modern fantasy. Elves, dwarves, dragons, orcs, wizards, all came to life in his four books and with their release, the face of science ficton/fantasy was forever changed. Tolkien took fantasy out of the world of fairy tales and into a world of high adventure. Fantasy is a genre that has often failed in Hollywood, but Lord of the Rings builds a serious and detailed fantasy movie. It is a wonderful film.
Fantasy is a great paradox in Hollywood. The suits normally screw fantasy movies up so badly that no audience likes them. Since no audience likes them, they label the genre as a non-starter. Sometimes they try to line the insides of their Mercedez SUV's with baby sealskin with movies like Reign of Fire and Black Knight. With LotR, the money was spent and the actors were picked to fit the roles and scenes perfectly. Hollywood certainly drove this movie into our lives and with a $109 million budget I am sure they wanted to dive in but they left a lot of it alone rather than trying to commercialize the movie itself. Given its huge commerical success - it paid for itself in the first two weekends - we can be glad that all three movies were already filmed before the suits step in to muck things up.
The Fellowship of the Ring has so much in it that three hours doesn't seem like enough time. Much of the background of the history is told in single lines. Often your eyes are too busy sucking up the scenery to comprehend what was said. Gandalf's discussions with Saruman about the crystal ball's powers and later his conversation with Elrond about the orc-goblin hybrids is an example. Later, Gandalf speaks to a butterfly that returns later with the aid of a great eagle. Astute readers of The Hobbit recognize the eagle, but many casual viewers think the eagle and the butterfly are one. Once again, little is explained and our minds must be used to fill in the details. This gives Fellowship a quality of richness that will give us a fresh view each time we watch it.
The DVD of Fellowship is a bit of an anomaly. We know they are coming out with a newer version in 60 days. We know that it will have almost an hour of new footage and include more features than we could watch in a lifetime. This initial release is a placeholder for the greater collectors edition. Still, on it's own it isn't bad at all. For $16 you get a 16x9 enhanced 2.35 to 1 picture and a Dolby Digital EX soundtrack. There is a second disc including a couple of interesting featurettes and a 10 minute preview of The Two Towers. There is no DTS track and no directors commentary, something that is missing from a movie as wonderful as this. For the money, one can hardly pass up this DVD even if it is temporary.
Rare are movies that are big Hollywood hits and also truly great movies in their own right. Fellowship is one such movie and looking back twenty years we will see the great story, great characters and wonderful fantasy the movie paints for us. It is an excellent film.
From: Mike ( mshea@liquidtheater.com ) on 20 November 2002
Subject: LotR is Hollywood but good!
Even though Lord of the Rings was shot entirely in New Zealand by New Zealand folk, it was financed by a big Hollywood producer. They did have say on the content and there were a number of specifics that had to be cleared or changed based on their feedback. The director's commentary on the new Extended version talks a lot about this. For example, samples of the Cave Troll animation had to be sent in before it was included.
It is very clear, however, that the makers of Lord of the Rings love the books. They are fans, plain and simple, and it shows in their work.
I do have to say that scenes like the staircase collapse before the Bridge of Khazidum should have been cut instead of Aragorn's song of the elven maiden or the giving of the gifts by Galadriel which offer much more to the story than the gratuitous action scene. The keeping of action scenes and the removal of scenes that follow the story is a pretty typical Hollywood move, catering to the short attention span audience "Triple X" fans they expect to fill the seats.
I do agree, however, that Lord of the Rings is one of the greatest movies of the year and maybe the best fantasy movie ever done.
From: emyers ( emyers@yahoo.com ) on 20 November 2002
Subject: EVIL
RYAN is evil
This is the best movie EVER MADE
From: Jono ( jono@gayrower.co.nz ) on 19 November 2002
Subject: My two cents
Good review Mike.
One point that deserves correction is that this movie shouldn't be credited to Hollywood. It was made in New Zealand, by New Zealanders, in a New Zealand Studio. That is why it isn't another Hollywood fantasy farce. It is also the reason why it remains true to the original book, as you said, "...they left a lot of it alone rather than trying to commercialize the movie itself".
My response to the naive, arrogant comments that Ryan Garland made is this: 'Get an artistic bone in your body and read the book. 4 Oscar Awards, 2 Guilds and 5 BAFTAS can't be wrong'.
From: Ryan Garland ( jakethecake@collegeclub.com ) on 21 August 2002
Subject: I thought the movie was crap!
There wasn't much excitement and the story didn't draw me in. There was a lot of babble about the ring, but not much action around it. There was a lot of running through forests and it looks like the movie makers spent most of their money on creating elaborate environments and settings.
I remember liking the cartoon version, "the hobbit." But this was 3 hours of this nonsense boredom with no ending what-so-ever. I understand it was supposed to be a fantasy film and not an action film, but it didn't have enough plot development to hold my interest. It just lacked entertainment value.
It wasn't the blockbuster that I wanted or expected. It couldn't live up to the hype.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. You are free to copy, distribute, display, and make derivative works under the conditions that you give the original author credit and you not use this work for commercial purposes.
From: Roric Gibbs ( gimli@centurytel.net ) on 12 January 2003
Subject: Re: Ryan's Bashing
I can't really understand what the hell you want out of your rantings? You're retarded if you think this movie is a waste of time? You seriously need to pick up a book and read it, instead of wasting your life.... take it easy and enjoy the greatest Author in history's work whether it is on screen or in books.