New York Film Critics tap "Lord of the Rings" year's best

Reuters ^ | 15th December 2003

[maquiladora]

NEW YORK (Reuters) - "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King," the final installment of a cinematic trilogy based on the writings of J.R.R. Tolkien, was named best picture of the year on Monday by the New York Film Critics Circle.

The off-beat comedy "Lost In Translation," from Focus Features, won a pair of major awards doled out by the critics, with Bill Murray named best actor and Sofia Coppola taking best director honors.

Hope Davis took the best actress award for her performances in "American Splendor," and "The Secret Lives of Dentists."

The film critics group, which has been issuing awards since 1935, is comprised of 35 New York-based film critics from daily newspapers, weekly newspapers and magazines.

More than 40 percent of the film critics' choices for best picture have gone on to win the Oscars in the same category.

Shohreh Aghdashloo was named best supporting actress for "House of Sand and Fog," while Eugene Levy was named best supporting actor for "A Mighty Wind."

The Brazilian movie "City of God" was named best foreign film.

Film Critics Circle chairman Andrew Johnston, of Radar Magazine, said there had been a slew of close contests.

"I think the degree the wealth was spread around reflected how close much of the voting was," said Johnston. "All the movies that won something were strong contenders in a number of categories."

Johnston would not give out specific details of the multi-round balloting, but said the best picture award for "The Lord of the Rings," was "reasonably decisive," and in his view appropriately so.

"It is easily the best of the three," Johnston said of the New Line Cinemas adventure trilogy shot in New Zealand. "It's amazing epic film making."

[maquiladora]

According to the people who follow the Oscars, award shows etc. this is a total shock, NYFCC almost always goes for small, arty and stuffy. For a fantasy epic to win, well, it shows just have good ROTK must be.

[JenB]

A "well, duh" Ring Ping...

[ecurbh]

Ring Ping!!

There and Back Again: The Journeys of Flat Frodo

Anyone wishing to be added to or removed from the Ring-Ping list, please don't hesitate to let me know.

[Lil'freeper]

More than 40 percent of the film critics' choices for best picture have gone on to win the Oscars in the same category.

Don't know if this is good news or bad.

[baseballfanjm]

It's VERY good for Return of the King. The NYFCC often gives indy or artsy films their award, films like Mulholland Drive, Far From Heaven and Topsy-Turvy, that are more obscure to the general public. Their embracing of a huge blockbuster, one that's guaranteed to have MASSIVE box-office, is a big suprise. ROTK was already favored to win the Best Picture Oscar, but it wasn't expected to get support from the critics groups. This puts it way out front in the race.

[Lil'freeper]

I'll take your word for it! 40% just isn't very impressive.

[maquiladora]

It's a not a statistical thing really. The NYFCC Best Picture winner hasn't been an Oscar winner since 1993 (Schindler's List). They like going for arty alternatives rather than Oscar friendly movies, but when they do go for commercial, big movies (very very very rare, and its happened this time) then it's a sign that ROTK is so well loved by critics that, well, it's just about unstoppable, like Schindler's List was.

[Maigret]

Did you happen to see Ebert's show last night? I rarely watch it, but caught it just as they 'pre' reviewed ROTK. The dippy younger guy says he wasn't a Tolkien fan - no surprises there - but he said that now having seen the whole trilogy the first two make so much more sense and as a complete film, he really liked it.

Ebert said basically the same thing, very good review for ROTK and that all together the films were 'legendary' filmmaking.

[baseballfanjm]

That 40% nuber is because, I suppose, they don't normally select big studio films. They go for films that aren't major Best Picture contenders a lot of the time. That they gave their award to a big budget blockbuster that was favored to win the Oscar with or without their support is a big suprise.

[baseballfanjm]

number=number

[baseballfanjm]

The only thing that was really against "Return of the King" is that it is a fantasy. Never has a sci-fi or fantasy film won Best Picture. The last, before the Lord of the Rings films, to even get a nod was "Beauty and the Beast". But the Lord of the Rings trilogy of books is so revered that that may not really matter.

[BradyLS]

But the Lord of the Rings trilogy of books is so revered that that may not really matter.

In reviews, the trilogy that Tolkien wrote has almost become supplanted by Jackson's. Very few reviews that I've read give credit to Tolkien for writing such a tremendous story. What they generally say is that fans have been waiting for a movie-version for a long time and that Jackson delivered it. It's as if to say Tolkien's story couldn't possibly be made into a good movie and that it took the team of Jackson, Walsh, and Boyens to beat it into shape.

With everyone I've talked to, long-time readers and never-have-reads, it seems the parts of the movie they enjoy the mostt are those parts that hew the most closely to the books.

[Restorer]

It's as if to say Tolkien's story couldn't possibly be made into a good movie and that it took the team of Jackson, Walsh, and Boyens to beat it into shape.

Admit it. Would you have thought, three years ago, that it was possible for anyone to make a movie of LOTR that would make 90% of the fans happy? I wouldn't. Please don't minimize the totally unprecedented accomplishment of this team.

Although I agree that the movies are least effective where they deviate most from the book.

[maquiladora]

Yeah, looks like Ebert will give it 3.5/4 and he didn't really have any problems with it. All the NY papers and the LA Times have given it rave reviews now too, and in fact on MetaCritic.com ROTK is currently the most critically acclaimed film of all time on the same score as The Godfather at a perfect 100/100.

[StrictTime]

Ok. When FOR was nominated for Best Picture, I predicted (and I know I wasn't alone) that they would wait until ROTK to give PJ his Best Picture Oscar. I might be the only one who thinks that they should also give him a special award for achievement, sorta like they did for Toy Story. Like Toy Story, Rings is ground-breaking cinema.

[BradyLS]

Admit it. Would you have thought, three years ago, that it was possible for anyone to make a movie of LOTR that would make 90% of the fans happy? I wouldn't. Please don't minimize the totally unprecedented accomplishment of this team.

You're right. I wouldn't have thought it possible. But I'm not one of those cheerleaders that thinks the series is faultless, either. The throngs that enjoy the 'Rings now probably never read the series, or dismissed it because a friend or prof told them to. I hope the people that enjoy the movies and know nothing more will invest a paltry $20 for the real thing.

BEFORE I read the books, I actually liked Bakshi's version. And I still find the Rankin/Bass version of the Hobbit to be remarkably well done.

I loved Jackson's Fellowship and simply wonder (loudly) why he didn't stick to the story in TTT.

[My2Cents]

I doubt ROTK or Peter Jackson will win Oscars. Jackson refuses to play the game that Hollywood demands of producers, directors, and actors to win the award. Besides, his message in the film series that there is such a thing as evil in the world, and that evil must be confronted at all costs, is anathema to the Hollywood left.

[Restorer]

I loved Jackson's Fellowship and simply wonder (loudly) why he didn't stick to the story in TTT.

Actually, I agree with you on that. He had a great story all laid out for him, and he changed it, for the most part, for the worse.