Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

[Review of] The Lord Of The Rings: The Fellowship Of The Ring
Home Theater Forum ^ | 28 Nov 2001 | "Ron & Chris"

Posted on 11/27/2001 8:56:31 PM PST by sourcery

The Lord Of The Rings: The Fellowship Of The Ring





Cast (Major Roles Only)

Elijah Wood as Frodo Baggins
Sir Ian McKellen as Gandalf
Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn
Sir Ian Holm as Bilbo Baggins
Sean Astin as Sam Gamgee
Billy Boyd as Pippin Took
Dominic Monaghan as Merry Brandybuck
Orlando Bloom as Legolas
John Rhys-Davies as Gimli
John Rhys-Davies (voice) as Treebeard
Sean Bean as Boromir
Cate Blanchett as Galadriel
Liv Tyler as Arwen
Christopher Lee as Saruman
Brad Dourif as Grima Wormtongue
Andy Serkis (voice) as Smeagol (Gollum)

Director:

Peter Jackson



A review by Ronald Epstein

One ring to rule them all,
One ring to find them,
one ring to bring them all and in
the darkness bind them.

Published in 1954-1955, J.R.R. Tolkien's masterpiece Lord Of The Rings trilogy still remains one of the
most definitive works of imaginary fiction ever written. The extraordinary efforts to get this trilogy to
the screen is a testament of how popular these stories are today. New Line has taken a gamble and risked
everything by filming all three movies back-to-back without knowing the fate of the original release.
The Fellowship of the Ring is the very first of the Tolkien trilogy. It will be followed up with
The Two Towers (2002) and Return of the King (2003).

As release date slowly draws nearer, everyone is holding their breath. Will this film live up to expectations?
Will this movie make a strong enough impact that audiences will anxiously want to remain loyal to the
films that will follow? The answer is a definitive YES on all accounts.

Lord Of The Rings will make its mark in film history. Fans will embrace this film and newcomers will
be in complete awe of one of the most visually entertaining films ever made....and this is only the beginning!

The film begins with lengthy female narrative that tells the story of Middle Earth - the ancient land of elves,
dwarves, hobbits, wizards and other creatures. We are told of the creation of the individual rings that
were handed down to the wisest and most noblest creatures of Middle Earth. We are then told of the ONE
ring that was forged out of Mount Doom -- the ring that controlled all others -- worn by the dark and
evil Lord Sauren. We are told of a battle and the defeat of Sauren and how his ring is eventually lost
only to be found by Gollum, a lowly creature that gets poisoned by its power. The ring is eventually
stolen by hobbit named Bilbo Baggins. And so, this is where the trilogy begins.....

It's a beautiful day in the Shire, the peaceful home of the Hobbits. A carriage rolls through a lone road
that parts meadows of lush grass and farmland. It is Gandalf the Wizard visiting his old Hobbit friend,
Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm). It is Bilbo's birthday, and the old hobbit is more concerned about leaving the
Shire rather than partake in any party. Something is very heavy on Bilbo's mind, and Gandalf is watching
him closely. That evening, Bilbo's party is in full swing with some of the most amazing and beautiful firework
displays ever seen on film. When Bilbo makes a daring announcement to his party guests, Gandalf realizes that
Bilbo is in possession of a very important ring. Gandalf convinces Bilbo to give up the ring, and give it to
the very young Frodo (Elijah Wood). When the secret of the ring is finally revealed to the old Wizard, Frodo
is warned to leave the Shire at once. Hence, the adventure of a lifetime begins.

Clocking in at about 3 hours running length, Lord Of The Rings doesn't waste time. Every minute of
the film is used to remain as faithful to the book as possible. The most important aspect of this film is
that it had to properly tell the story as written. The end result is that this film becomes a definitive
and accurate recreation of the story.

Though it had been 20 years since I last read the trilogy, the film brought back every single memory I had
of the story with visuals that exceeded my own imagination. You will see visuals in this film that go beyond
anything you have seen before. The film is visually beautiful as we travel through the lush green grasses
of the Shire with the huts built into the hills, or, the beautiful mountain village of Rivendell, inhabited
by the Elves. With so much beauty also comes the darkness of Mordor and Mount Doom so grimly recreated
with cameras that swoop into the lowest depths of these locations as we watch armies of death manufacturer
weapons as they grow, amass, and hunt the one that holds the ring.

Make no mistake about it, this film is very dark. The most terrifying creatures of Middle Earth are
realistically brought to life. Whether it be the Ringwraiths, dark riders who are neither dead or alive
or the armies of orcs who inhabit the Mountains of the Dwarf kingdom, this movie manages to keep your
heart racing with scene after scene of edge-of-the-seat battles set to sweeping music of Howard Shore.

I have two favorite sequences in this movie. One involves a duel between Gandalf (Ian Holm) and the
elder wizard, Saruman (Christopher Lee). With each Wizard testing their powers against each other,
the duel becomes one of the most memorable scenes of the film as we see Gandalf helplessly spinning
around the floor. Another favorite sequence involves Frodo putting the ring on his finger and not
only becoming invisible to the outside world, but being visible to the inner world of darkness. These
effect sequences are creatively reproduced on screen to the point where you get chills running down
your spine.

The biggest hurdles that New Line faces with Lord Of The Rings is the 3-hour running time and
the fact that this is not a film that is going to appeal to all audiences. While the fans who read
the original books are going to be enthralled with its faithfulness to the book, I couldn't help but
hear many women of the audience talking afterwards about how much they were unimpressed by the whole
film. Fans of the books and Fantasy films alike are in for the treat of their lives. Lord Of The Rings
has accomplished what many thought was the impossible -- to bring a live-action film to the screen
that accurately portrays the books as written, with enough visual eyes candy and engrossing battle scenes
that could very well make this the STAR WARS trilogy of the new century.

On a scale of 1-5, I give this film a 5.

Opens December 18th, 2001


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-208 next last
To: sourcery
Call me shallow, but I'm mainly looking forward to seeing Marton Csokas... yummy!
81 posted on 11/28/2001 7:22:42 AM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: discostu
I agree with your argument 100%. If we want decent movies, we'd better go and watch them when they come along once in a while. I think that there's another reason for supporting LOTR: we might persuade Hollywood to pay attention to ensemble casts again, as opposed to just one or two stars.
82 posted on 11/28/2001 7:28:12 AM PST by slhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: slhill
So my question is, is anyone planning to boycott LOTR given that Ian McKellen is a prominent gay activist?

Not me. If I "boycotted" every movie that had a gay person associated with it, I'd probably never get to see another movie again for the rest of my life.

83 posted on 11/28/2001 7:29:22 AM PST by jpl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: rintense
I too,am looking forward to the movie.
84 posted on 11/28/2001 7:29:49 AM PST by cardinal4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: RonDog
This movie will be bigger than Star Wars.

Did you hear me? Let me say that again...

THIS MOVIE WILL BE BIGGER THAN STAR WARS!!!!!!

Ever since last Tuesday I've been listening to the soundtrack every chance I get. Some tracks on that make for even more lethally fast driving than "Duel Of The Fates" ever was! :-)

85 posted on 11/28/2001 7:30:38 AM PST by Darth Sidious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Darth Reagan
I understand that some changes are necessary to translate 1500 pages into 3 movies, but as long as they don't replace major characters I'm fine.

Well, yes... It's using one medium to interpret another. Of course, I'll have to wait 'til I see the movie to critique it. I stand by my comment about changing a classic though. If I take a photograph of the Mona Lisa, I shouldn’t use Photoshop to fix her smile.

I haven't seen or heard the delivery of the "come and claim him" line.

I agree that Bombadil is an easy and painless character to cut. (My least favorite part of the book.) I would prefer they cut entire characters rather than change them or rewrite them--It's much cleaner and historically accurate.

There you go--that's better. It's like rewriting history. It is history--for goodness sakes. It's the history of Middle Earth and Tolkien painstakingly preserved it for us, and we shouldn't rewrite it.

86 posted on 11/28/2001 7:33:53 AM PST by Samwise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Wm Bach
I'm wondering, do you think I'll get flamed?

Yawn....oh bore...why bother? Not worthy of the effort...yawn.

87 posted on 11/28/2001 7:38:12 AM PST by Samwise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: slhill
So my question is, is anyone planning to boycott LOTR given that Ian McKellen is a prominent gay activist?

Will gays boycott Ian McKellen because he starred in a movie based on a story written by a devout Christian?

88 posted on 11/28/2001 7:40:31 AM PST by JoeSchem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sourcery
I can't wait, but it can be as faithful to the story line as it wants to be. If it doesn't hold the theology that Tolkein was so interested in sharing I will be very disappointed.

I remember the movie adaptation of The Shining. It was a good adaptation as screen-plays go, but it lacked something. I couldn't put my finger on it, but I was very disappointed. In a later interview, Stephen King said that Kubrick ruined the movie because he didn't believe in G-d. Therefore, what was intended to be a movie about good vs. evil was simply a movie about Jack Nicholson going crazy. Bingo!

I hope Fellowship does not suffer the same fate.

Shalom.

89 posted on 11/28/2001 7:40:54 AM PST by ArGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarkWar
So you think Elijah Woods looks like a girl? And you are attracted to girls? Let's examine your behavior, shall we?

1) You claim not to like Lord of the Rings or any work of this nature and yet you constantly appear on these threads.

2) The nature of your posts are to show that LOTR is somehow a latent homosexual story.

3) You believe that all such stories, I assume even going back to Roland and the Paladins, are along the same lines as you have portrayed. (i.e. Young man just entering manhood is guided by an older man who is not his father.) And you view this as a commercial of some kind for NAMBLA.

As far as I can see, you are the only one who views the movies as such and then you want to rail against them. The funny thing about projection is that the projector often has no idea why they fixate on things and why the things they fixate on make them so upset. The only other reason that I can come up with on why you want to rain on other people's parade by posting stuff like this is you are a troll looking to cause problems, but I can't believe another Freeper would be that big of a jackass.

90 posted on 11/28/2001 7:43:11 AM PST by Anitius Severinus Boethius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Arkinsaw
I think people use magic in this movie. I'm scared for my children's sanity.

There are actually not that many people in this movie, and none of them use magic. Some Wizards do. The Elves do, if you can call it magic. The Elves don't call it magic, but they don't bother to describe what it is. The Elves aren't very interested in people, as a rule.

Shalom.

91 posted on 11/28/2001 7:45:29 AM PST by ArGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: JoeSchem
I don't know. Are there any gay posters on FR who'd give their views? Were you implying that the idea of a boycott was absurd? If so, why?
92 posted on 11/28/2001 7:46:08 AM PST by slhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: AuntToots
I'm waiting for something to happen.

A hint - this isn't a Tom Clancy novel. The trilogy is all about the characters and how they rise to the occasion. It is almost not at all about the particulars of the occasion and it is definately not about the action.

Shalom.

93 posted on 11/28/2001 7:47:29 AM PST by ArGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ArGee
I can't remember my LOTR well enough to be sure, but doesn't Aragorn have one of the Rings? The rings are magical.
94 posted on 11/28/2001 7:48:22 AM PST by slhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

Comment #95 Removed by Moderator

To: ArGee
It's not *only* about the action, but the action is there and it's thrilling. I can still (mis)remember some of the words off by heart: "Sam got up. He was dazed, and blood pouring from his head dripped in his eyes." [From the denouement with Sam, Frodo and Gollum in the mountain]
96 posted on 11/28/2001 7:50:13 AM PST by slhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: ArGee
and none of them use magic

Good point.

97 posted on 11/28/2001 7:54:55 AM PST by ThomasMore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: slhill
So my question is, is anyone planning to boycott LOTR given that Ian McKellen is a prominent gay activist?

Not me. I understand Israelis boycotting Wagner because Wagner has the spirit of violence and national superiority that Hitler took for his own. (Hitler was a big fan of Wagner). However, LOTR is not about sexuality at all so I can't imagine ever making the link, no matter what the actors do in their own time.

Shalom.

98 posted on 11/28/2001 7:56:23 AM PST by ArGee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Samwise
Yawn....oh bore...why bother? Not worthy of the effort...yawn.

I rest my case. heh heh

99 posted on 11/28/2001 7:57:20 AM PST by Wm Bach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: slhill
doesn't Aragorn have one of the Rings?

Not to my knowledge.

The rings are magical.

Not in today's sense or maybe the Harry Potter sense.

100 posted on 11/28/2001 7:58:10 AM PST by ThomasMore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-208 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson