|
The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the
Ring
Reviews:
Kyle DuVall Matt McConnel
Li Rapkin
Review
by:
Kyle Duvall
© 2001 New Line Cinema |
After
it was all over, after the blood and thunder had faded, after
Gandalf faced the Balrog on the bridge of Khazad-Dum, after
I witnessed a thousand orcs swarming across the cold stone
of an underground city, after all of these images disappeared,
the visions that haunt me from Peter Jackson's adaption of
Tolkien's The Fellowship Of The Ring are not the ones
of valiant combat. They are not the moments where imaginary
creatures and achingly imagined fictional places came to vibrant
life through the craftsmanship of Peter Jackson and the WETA
visual effects workshop. Instead, what keeps me dazed and
distracted the day after I spent 3 hours in Middle Earth,
the moments that are burned in my brain like retinal afterimages,
making me wonder whether I will ever have a film experience
like The Fellowship of The Ring again, are the quiet
things:
It's the look of devastation and the realization of a terrible
burden that passes oh-so-briefly on Viggo Mortensen's face
after Aragorn and the fellowship leave Moria.
It's the way Ian McKellan makes you see and feel, without
uttering a word, the sadness and inevitability in Gandalf's
soul when he realizes Frodo is the only one who can bear the
ring to Mordor.
Its one heart-wrenchingly beautiful moment I won't spoil now,
a moment so purely cinematic yet so eloquent and subtle and
heroic in its conveyance of the narrative it literally devastated
me. A moment I fear I will never see the like of again.
And it was a moment where not a single sword was drawn, and
not a single CGI creature was in sight.
In a movie where fiery beasts clash with wizards, hellish
towers rear to black skies, and elves haunt beautiful treetop
realms, this is a revelation not only about the film itself,
but also about Tolkien's story. Jackson's Fellowship
is an adaption in its noblest form, neither a static retelling
of Tolkien's beloved novel, nor a simplified, inadequate abrreviation
of it. It is a film that doesn't just throw Tolkien's ideas
up on screen to be seen, it is one that draws on all the wordless
language of film, the language of editing and composition
and performance, to make Tolkien's vision experienced. Here
is a synthesis of storytelling, from the primal to the digital,
all come full circle.
The Lord of the Rings is the tale of a very small person
who must destroy the most powerful and most evil object in
creation, an object which itself seems insignificant and harmless:
a plain, golden ring. Created by the dark Lord Sauron and
invested with much of his will and soul, the shadowy, unknowable
lord of the infernal realm of Mordor has only to regain this
ring to overwhelm the elves, dwarves, men and hobbits of Middle
Earth forever. Through fate, a simple Hobbit must carry the
ring into the very domain of Sauron and destroy it. The fate
of a world rests on the shoulders of one who has never known
battle, or death, or real loneliness.
Fellowship is the first part of this tale and it details
how young Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) and a few of his fellow
Hobbits, are chosen by fate and the powers of good to make
the ultimate quest, and how even the aid of the most heroic
of men, elves and dwarves, cannot change the fact that the
fate of good and evil ultimately lies in the small hands of
one.
It is a story that, at its essence, is fairy tale simple,
but Tolkiens' fairy tale is one writ in dark fire and wrapped
around iron. Here is a European myth world of dwarves and
elves and monsters as familiar as any bedtime story, but Tolkien's
world, unlike the allegorical fairytales of youth, is one
backed by an obsessively detailed history, a history that
is every bit as rich as the main story it supports, and one
that is so evocative of our primal imagination of darkness
and light, good and evil, that its hard to believe it was
conceived by a twentieth century scholar and not some wizened
old primeval storyteller whispering sagas across the ages.
And Jackson's film shows that not only is The Lord of The
Rings an epic that could be translated to film, but one
that should be translated to film. Jackson's film is
not merely an interpretation of a text, but an expansion upon
it, and, simultaneously, a masterpiece in its own right.
The reverence Jackson and his crew have for Tolkien's source
material is already legendary, but even more than this respect
and sincerity, it is Jackson's brilliant understanding of
all the things Tolkien couldn't do in prose form that makes
The Fellowship of The Ring something infinitely more than
a set of moving illustrations to complement a novel, and turns
it into a vessel to go deeper into the story, even if you've
already read it a hundred times.
With the camera's gaze at his command and all the tools of
editing in his control, Jackson, and especially his cast,
know exactly what things couldn't be expressed in Tolkien's
words and how to evoke them in film. Witness the way Jackson
makes the One Ring itself a more immediately foreboding presence
than ever. The way it dominates the frame in some shots, and
the way, even when incredibly small in the composition, it
commands the viewer's attention, articulates the sinister
power of the ring in ways Tolkien's words never could. And
the ring's effect on all the characters, from the subtle influence
it has on the strongest of the strong (Aragorn and Gandalf),
to the nature of its twisted grip on the most beloved and
humble (Bilbo) has never been so harrowing or authentic as
it is onscreen.
And the looks of pain or joy or fear that are channeled through
the cast at all the right points are instances of both the
actors and directors orchestrating performance at its purest.
Tolkien's evocation of sorrow and bravery and friendship is
unforgettable, especially in Fellowship, but even Tolkien,
an expert on language of the highest order, could not invent
words that could say quite the same thing that Mckellan's
furrowed brow, or Elijah Wood's wide-eyes, both wondrous and
terrified, can say in the tiniest fraction of a second. Through
no deficiency of Tolkien, nor the deficiency of the written
word, there are some things that just can't be put onto a
thin, fragile piece of paper. That is part and parcel of the
writer's art, and when a Film director, like Jackson, can
pinpoint the spaces between the notes in a literary symphony
like Tolkien's, and fill those spaces with new tones and themes
to electrify the entire experience, the art of adaption transcends
mere translation and becomes something both symbiotic and
sublime. Like any adaption of a revered book, there is always
a tendency to ask why make a beloved story, especially one
so pure and complete in its own right as The Lord Of The
Rings into film at all?
This is why:
The film is that good. And just like 2001 or Gone
With the Wind, it won't be just those who have scrutinized
the texts religiously who will be swept into the quest of
The Fellowship of The Ring. The 40-ish housewife sitting
next to me in the theater, the one whose pre-show comments
made it clear she had never touched Tolkien's tomes, was weeping
right alongside me, someone among whose earliest memories
are visions of my grandmother reading me The Hobbit.
The sharp intakes of breath and the sobs of other viewers,
geek folk like myself as well as thrill hungry movie fans
who just came for a good adventure pic, were a soundscape
all their own in the theater where I saw The Fellowship
Of the Ring. Regardless of its final gross, or the awards
or lack of awards it receives, something special has been
brought to life in this film, or should I say brought to life
once more, only now with shadows and light instead of pen
and paper.
Of course, don't doubt that this tale isn't also as riveting
an action-suspense-horror film as you are likely to see. Fellowship
is a thing of beauty, but this beauty will knock you cold.
You want to have your cake and eat it too? Well, grab your
fork and sit down at Jackson and company's table, because
there's action and carnage and daring escapes and horrific
monsters on a scale never seen before. There are flaming grim-reaper
Ringwraiths, whip-cracking Balrog hellspawn…swordfights that
would have Maximus peeing his toga, and a cave troll that
I'm dying to see in a cage match with King Kong. Oh yeah,
and there are severed limbs and flying arrows, decapitation,
elderly gentlemen beating on each other with magic…
Rings clocks in at 3 hours. Does it feel like a three
hour movie? Yes it does. Are you ready for three more hours
when it's all over? Yes to that too. Will this movie make
you cry? I bawled like a baby at lest 3 times.
Is this going to topple your best movie desert island list?
Only time will tell on that one. But I can say one thing honestly.
I watched Star Wars: A New Hope while I was still reeling
from Fellowship of the Ring. As someone who bears a
tattoo of Yoda on his leg, who owns 3 different editions of
the trilogy, and whose house is so full of Star Wars
trinkets it looks like a ILM storage house, I have to say
that, although there is an exuberance and joy in Star Wars
that is not in Jackson's brooding Fellowship, Lucas'
seminal film seems pretty thin in comparison to the heroic
poetry conjured on screen by Jackson. In the wake of Jackson's
gothic, primal mythmaking, Star Wars seemed a very
joyful diversion and nothing else. Comparisons between the
two films are inevitable, and in most ways pointless. Still,
I couldn't help but feel a chill when I realized my experience
with Fellowship was destined to color my perception
of all of my favorite films. It's scary, and its beautiful.
Perhaps not unlike the novels themselves.
Crushed almost to nothingness under the weight of everything
perfect about this film there are a few caveats. The biggest
controversy surrounding the development of this film was the
rumored elevation of the decidedly peripheral character of
the elf-princess Arwen to a prominent player in the story.
This controversy peaked when it was announced Liv Tyler would
be taking the role of Aragorn's love-interest, and rumors
began circulating that Arwen had been written as a "warrior
princess".
Arwen's portrayal in the film is not the disaster chat-room
Tolkienites might have prophesied, but its not exactly justified
either. Although she handles the role well, and speaks elvish
beautifully, one can't help but feel the altered way Jackson
inserts the character into the story is purely obligatory.
You're not likely to lament the fact that Arwen meets Aragorn
and the hobbits early and bears the injured Frodo to Rivendell
(a considerable departure from the books) but you will ask
yourself why the change was made. In a film where all of Jackson's
deviations seem necessary and often expansive, this change
serves no purpose. It's unquestionably not the travesty most
geeks achingly worried about, but the question of Why? will
still linger.
The imagery of this film is so primal, that it is both its
greatest strength, and its weakness. When Gandalf sits down
in the Library of Minas Tirith and begins perusing old texts,
the tableau of a wizard studying the dusty volumes is like
an image you've seen a thousand times, yet never seen before.
The same is delightfully true of the hellish castle of Minas
Morgul, and the mythically idyllic Shire. But, delving into
the primal can sometimes dredge up the conventional, and the
archetypal is always just a few steps removed from the cliché.
This fact is, at times, most evident in Jackson's representations
of the Elves. Mysterious and glorious, yet at the same time
terribly powerful, Tolkien's vision of the elves was one that
articulated beauty, sadness, and danger with a very important
touch of inexpressible alienness. Lothlorien, the haven of
the elf-queen Galadriel, was a place, in the texts, so achingly
beautiful and so natural, yet somehow otherworldly, that one
couldn't help but simultaneously mourn its implied decline
while secretly breathe a sigh of relief that such awesome
power was fading from the world of mortals.
Although Cate Blanchett's articulation of Galadriel is riveting
in its integration of all these elements and her exchange
with Frodo is compelling, the setting of Lothlorien as a whole
does not fair as well. The film's visualization of the elves
is unequivocally conventional: their beauty is defined by
gauzy, windblown gowns, backlighting and soft filters, cinematic
tools of enchantment as old as the silent era. The classic
technique falls a bit short of the primal, familiar-yet-unreachable
ethos Jackson is going for, and the mesmerizing beauty of
Lothlorien's tree-city is reduced to a few dark shots of some
admittedly spectacular tree-top edifices. The gritty, dirt-under-the-fingernails
sensibility that is so perfect everywhere else in Fellowship,
is wholly out of place in the Lothlorien scenes. The greatest
haven of elf-kind is not a dark and dingy place in the books,
it is an almost ethereal, heavenly pocket of light and purity
in a tainted world. Jackson's Lothlorien does have its moments
of haunting spectacle, but on the whole a sequence that should
be as hypnotic as the Siren scene from O Brother Where
Art thou ends up as a few too-brief shots of eye-candy.
Likewise, the elf Legolas, although articulated as a formidable
bow-bending action hero by Orlando Bloom, does not have that
somehow alien air about him Tolkien's wood-elf has in the
books. He often seems like nothing more than a very contemplative
man with slightly pointy ears. Of course, as soon as Legolas
starts whipping arrows around left and right like Robin Hood's
worst nightmare, this shortcoming becomes easy to forget.
The truncated Lothlorien sequence also leaves out the very
charming subplot of the suspicious and gruff dwarf Gimli's
head-over-heels fascination with Queen Galadriel. In the film
we never see the respect and awe Gimli gains for Lothlorien
once he is brought within its bounds, a respect which develops
into the delightful bond Legolas and Gimli form in the subsequent
Rings books, and I hope Jackson has some compensating
scenes of Legolas and Gimli in the next film, or a great theme
of the saga will be lost.
Darkness always seems to be overwhelming light in the books,
but in this first film, doom is practically suffocating it.
Although I would much rather see the lighter elements of the
story sacrificed for the sake of maintaining the trilogies
evocative darkness than the opposite, the low-key treatment
of the pivotal Lothlorien sequence, will always be a tiny
flaw in Jackson's stunning jewel.
Fans of master Samwise Gamgee, Frodo's perennial down-to-earth
friend and gardener might feel shortchanged too. Although
Sean Astin Is Master Samwise in every way any fan could hope,
we could use a little more of the loyal, pragmatic hobbit
on screen.
On the other hand, Hobbits Merry and Pippen take on a greater
life in the film, near-ciphers in the Fellowship novel,
Jackson's integration of the comedic duo sets up their importance
in the films to come more effectively than the novel. You
may still have trouble remembering which is which, but on
film, they're definitely more than excess baggage.
Some voices have been trumpeting The Fellowship Of The
Ring as a harbinger of a new era of the blockbuster and
the bearer of a new, higher standard for fantastic film in
general, but Fellowship isn't likely to ignite a new
era in mainstream filmmaking the way Star Wars did
in 1977. It will inspire countless knock offs, and perhaps
even the occasional, sincere, skilled imitation of course.
But what makes Fellowship the monumental film it is
is not something that can be simply absorbed and noted and
copied. What makes Fellowship the best film I have
seen in a very, very long time is the filmmakers', from top
all the way down, love, respect and dedication for the story
that is being told. Sincerity and vision are not skills that
can be learned by simply studying and admiring any film. They
are not an aesthetic or formula that can be gained by simple
inspiration or imitation. Reverence, love and soul are aspects
singular to an aritst's heart and an artist's vision, and
unfortunately for us, their aren't destined to be too many
others out there with the heart of Peter Jackson and his crew.
Just thank goodness, for now, that Jackson has two more films
on the way, and a whole lifetime of work beyond The Lord
of The Rings. I will be going back to middle earth again
very soon, and for a very long time to come.
Rating: 5 rings…er bananas
Rating:
Review
by:
Matt McConnel
Yes, I
got into a pre-screening of The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship
of the Ring. Please don’t kill me. So here then is my
review; those purists who wish not to see the spoilers herein
turn away…
You have
been warned.
I told
you.
The
Good:
The
opening sequence is amazing. You get a whirlwind history of
the War of the Ring and how the ring came to be in the hands
of the hobbit Bilbo. The history is narrated by Cate Blanchett
(or as all will now know and fear her, Galadriel), and let
me tell you it is a treat to see the armies of elves and men
clash with the orcish hordes of Mordor. The lines of elven
infantry firing arrows into the onrushing orc ranks followed
by the body to body clash of arms is truly visually stunning.
The coup de gratis however, is when the human and elven look
up and see the dark lord Sauron himself. You then get to see
Sauron go to town on the opposing army, swinging his mace
and clearing the ranks. Just beautiful. Peter Jackson grabs
from the get go, and while he slackens his grip at times,
he never lets you forget that you are in his world for the
next three hours.
All the
artistic changes that I caught were very much justified within
the context of film. The two noted here are fairly major,
but be assured there are other minor ones. Note as well that
these are changes, not cuts. First there is the death of Boromir;
yes, he dies at the end of the movie, we aren’t left hanging
for another year to see how they deal with that scene. Strider
and Legolas are just in time to stop the orc archer from firing
the last shot into Boromir’s head, and a rather fantastic
sword fight between Strider and the orc ensues. Boromir conveys
the loss of the two hobbits, and in fact we have the redemptive
moment right there instead of having to wait until the middle
of The Two Towers.
The other
major artistic change is more story conveyed to Saruman. Unlike
Galadriel or some of the other semi-major players, Saruman
gets the full treatment, and becomes a sort of Darth Vader
to Sauron’s Emperor. The fight between Gandalf and Saruman
occurs right at the beginning of the film, and the continued
use of Saruman as the one who is placing physical barriers
in the path of the Fellowship lends a face and form to the
evil the Fellowship must fight against.
© 2001 New Line Cinema |
The soundtrack
is one of the better ones this year. It fits the movie well,
while not over powering it, and it matched scene by scene
nicely. Howard Shore, probably most famously known for his
work composing Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, once
more does an excellent job of matching action to sound. The
theme remains as a constant, to keep the anchor as it were,
and the rest just seems to flow out of it. At times the music
seems dangerously similar to Shore’s previous work, but the
piping woodwinds are just too appropriate for the tale, and
thankfully the boy has learned how to use drums.
As a bit
of a segue to the next part, let me expound for a moment on
the nearness to the story. Despite the minor changes, the
overall flow remains the same. Point A to B, to C, to D, and
so on remains more or less in line with the book. This becomes
both a blessing and a curse to the film; the nearness to the
text means some things are understandably cut for the purposes
of time. By the same token, Tolkien’s choppy, abrupt storytelling
comes across in startling clarity. Peter Jackson can do transitions
better than this, we know, so why does he choose to make such
brusque jumps. They can be followed without much difficulty,
true, but it’s a but like trying to hold a unregulated debate;
as the pace quickens, you start to overlap onto each other’s
points, and somewhere in there some things get lost.
The
Bad:
Too
much. The films would have benefited greatly from going by
the six-book model rather than the three. What pained me most
was the loss of one of my favorite minor characters, Tom Bombadil.
If the rumors I was hearing were true, the scene with Tom
and Old Man Willow was shot, or at least scripted, but obviously
didn’t make final cut. I can see why, three hours is more
than enough, but personally I wanted more of the story there
for us to see. I would have been much more pleased with six
two hour movies every six months to a year than the coming
three. But despite the fact that this was a labor of love
for everyone involved the fact that this was a major Hollywood
studio release is something to which it must bow. It can only
be hoped that the DVD, or even VHS releases of the movies
will contain some serious cut footage to appease those of
us who mourn for the loss of the likes of Tom and his wife.
Enya on
the soundtrack. Don’t get me wrong, I like Enya, but the song
she made for the ‘theme’, aka the thing they’ll cut for the
radio, really doesn’t match up to the tone of the rest of
the movie. Her lover’s theme is superb however, and fits nicely.
The other
big thing that bugged me was the CG. Peter Jackson did it
all in house with little to no contracting out. No ILM, no
Paramount special effects department, and no big names save
for Jackson and his boys. While I applaud the effort, and
they pull off some truly spectacular visuals (the Barlog is
NICE), some of the CG scenes remain with an air of the unreal.
This can be forgiven to an extent, but they succeed with such
realism in some of the other effects. One scene in Moria,
where Legolas jumps onto the head of a cave troll and shoots
an arrow down into the head looks so real, it then is a bit
startling to see the tell tales of CG in the shot. The primary
offenders are the scenes at Saruman’s keep, where the orcs,
goblins, etc., are building up their ranks and arms. There
are three sequences that fly over, around, and through the
mines and forges. The animation is just not right, and this
is brought to the fore whenever the scene has to focus onto
a single point of reality. The scenes loose something to the
CG in some places, and this detracts from the experience as
a whole.
The
Ugly:
The
Tolkien family feud surrounding the movies. Christopher Tolkien
is a right little bitch; not only does he blatantly rape his
father’s corpse for more cash in editing, re-editing, and
annotating his father’s legacy, he openly pans the films,
without seeing them one might add, and says his father would
have disapproved. In point of fact, he has practically disowned
his son, cutting him out of the family business and not speaking
to him for three years, because his son claimed that the movies
were a good idea. Christopher Tolkien has not spoken to his
son and not seen his grandson in three years because of a
movie. I know people take J.R.R. Tolkien’s work seriously,
but merciful mother of heaven above, the snit surrounding
the family in this regard is pitiful.
The
Conclusion:
I
went into the film with but one hope: to have my mind’s eye
cleansed of the taint that was the wretched, horrific, and
otherwise deplorable animated versions from the late 70’s.
I was satisfied and more. Despite all the little things, the
movie comes off, and comes off well. The opening sequence
alone is worth the price of a matinee ticket. It also gave
me the opportunity to enjoy Tolkien’s rich story without the
major pitfall of his writing, which is the ENDLESS PAGES OF
DESCRIPTION! (ahem) It was of great benefit to the filmmakers,
no doubt, to have such information to hand, but ye gods did
I get tired to reading it.
One ring
to rule them all, one ring to find them; one ring to bring
them all, and in the darkness bind them.
My precious…
Four and
a half grudging bananas (I wanted to give five).
Rating: 
Review
by:
Li Rapkin
I'm always
leery of books being made into movies. If it's done well,
such as the recent Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone,
some of the magic of the book is gone - those who read the
book will likely see Daniel Radcliffe as Harry, or Elijah
Wood as Frodo. Others may not even bother to read the book.
If it's done badly (I could go on and on about this, so pick
one) then people will probably go out of their way to avoid
the book…and if it's a genre film, it can do even more damage.
Tolkien's work has been bastardized and borrowed practically
since its publication, and the animated version of The Hobbit
by Ralph Bakshi probably made a disproportionate contribution
to putting the general public off the entire fantasy genre.
I hope that Jackson's first film in the trilogy will do even
more to bring audiences back. This film is gorgeous, well-executed,
and most of all, enjoyable.
If you're a Tolkien purist, you'll probably be a bit put out
by Jackson's rendering of Lord of the Rings. You also
know that there is absolutely no way that the entire book
would have fit into the three-hour running time, so try to
relax. If you haven't read the books, you get a reasonably
good rendering of the story. Either way, there's plenty to
enjoy. There isn't a bad performance in the film, although
I couldn't help thinking that Orlando Bloom (Legolas) has
an unfortunate resemblance to one of the leads on Dawson's
Creek. Liv Tyler (Arwen) and Cate Blanchett (Galadriel) have
only short appearances, but Tyler did much better than I expected,
and Blanchett was remarkable, conveying as much with her presence
as with she did her lines. I also enjoyed Viggo Mortensen's
performance as Aragorn, and Ian McKellen is the perfect Gandalf.
His wizard's duel with Christopher Lee (Saruman) was impressive,
reminding the audience forcefully that wizards are indeed
both powerful and quick to anger, despite appearances.
And as to appearances…the film is absolutely stunning. Jackson's
location scouts get extra points in my book for turning up
some of the most incredible scenery that New Zealand has to
offer. Likewise, the attention to detail in the production
design is impressive. I think this is best illustrated by
the startling, momentary transformation of Bilbo Baggins,
in Rivendell, as he makes a grab for the ring. The physical
change is so fast that you aren't left any distinct image,
but you definitely get the impression of serious evil. Every
single special effect is seamless, from the details like the
quality of light in elven territory and the appearance of
the lettering on the ring to the massive battle scenes with
thousands of orcs and the utter devastation of Mordor. The
Ring Wraiths are probably the best-designed effect in the
film, although they are portrayed as a bit under-powered,
compared to the book.
I have to give special congratulations to the linguistic team,
which included one of my friends from college, David Salo.
Bill Welden, one of the lead consultants, refers to David's
spell verse as "brilliant…in Sindarin (with no newly invented
words), yet rhyming and scanning to match Tolkien's own model".
I hope that makes up for the 2:00 AM phone calls from New
Zealand.
And finally, a caveat for those who are unfamiliar with the
trilogy…the ending is no ending. This is a trilogy, and we
don't get to the real end of the story until Christmas of
2003. If The Two Towers and The Return of the King
are as good, it'll be worth the wait.
Rating:
|
