Posted on 12/10/2001 2:57:51 AM PST by maquiladora
The film gets four pluses out of five.
Yes. The Lord of the Rings lives up to its expectations. The film is a magnificent adventure film with fantastic vista shots. It is also the most violent film ever that has got a PG11 rating in Sweden. It is exciting and at times brutal. Heads roll and creatures from hell roar in terror in the faces of the gaping spectators.
A good film pulls us into its reality and Lord of the Rings manages to capture the world of Tolkien. Peter Jackson skillfully integrates the dramatic scenery of New Zeeland with computer effects as the story evolves from the peaceful and rounded hills of the Shire to icey mountain tops, dangerous rivers and the beautiful elven places Rivendell and Lothlorien.
The almost three hour long film starts off with a prologue about the evil Sauron, the different rings and how Isildur during a gigantic battle becomes the owner of the most powerful ring. The fascinating villain of the books, Gollum, shows up in the prologue and is also shown in a glimpse later on.
Peter Jackson is faithful to the spirit of Tolkien, even if the film doesn’t follow the books dogmatically. The most faithful readers might miss a few details or get upset when the elven that saves Frodo when he is injured is Arwen (Liv Tyler). But the film benefits from her expanded role. It’s possible the non-Tolkien reader will perhaps scratch their heads from time to time.
But most of all this is a dramatic adventure to get absorbed by after a slow start. The film has got the perfect actors. Elijah Wood was born to play Frodo, Viggo Mortensen is an unbeatable hero as Aragorn and heavy-weighters like Ian McEllen and Cate Blanchett can make even the most high-flown lines to sound believeble. The Lord of the Rings is a saga with a great seriousness. The heros are unsecure and doubtful. The evil ones are selfsecure an arrogant when they think they can control the temptations of power. Its all convincing, from details like dirt under Frodo’s nails to wizard Saruman's (Christopher Lee) gigantic and horrifying tower where his evil army is grown. Good. Now I want to see the sequel.
Director Peter Jackson has transformed a literary epic into a feast for the eyes and mind, bringing picturesque Hobbiton to life from each hand-crafted house down to every single original teaspoon.
The narration explains the significance of Sauron’s ring. Whether good or evil prevails depends upon who has the magical ring. In the wrong hands, it is capable of destroying Middle-Earth.
Relating to Frodo –
On his journey, he is pursued by the evil nine Black Riders sent to capture him. It is not long before Frodo is embroiled in a series of vicious, bloody battles that, unlike the Harry Potter film, are definitely aimed at an older audience. I found much of this part truly terrifying. At one point they are surrounded by swirling mist so realistic that I could feel a chill on the back of my neck. And the ferocious orcs are even more terrifying on screen. They are grey, wrinkly, slime- coloured creatures which will surely play a part in many nightmares in weeks to come.
The orcs, together with the Uruk-hai warriors and a nasty cave troll in the Moria mines, attack Frodo as we follow him on his journey. The first 30 minutes of the film are a little slow, though I was happy enough immersing myself in Middle-earth and learning about hobbit craft and culture. But from then on it’s all action.
The story really works as a film and, like the tales themselves, the movie version has an appeal that’s bound to last. Sadly for JK Rowling, her Harry Potter simply does not have it on the same grand scale.
When Liv Tyler appears in a stunning cream-beaded dress that sets off her dark hair, she makes you gasp at her beauty. As the ethereal but tough elf Arwen, she performs brilliantly, particularly as she speaks largely in elf talk accompanied by subtitles.
It is gritty and scary in a down-to-earth yet mystical way that make you believe there could be a little of the hobbit in everyone. However, despite its PG certificate, I really would not recommend parents to take young children along – it’s far too gory for that.
But to everyone else, The Fellowship of the Ring will prove irresistible. It is a hugely satisfying watch and a chance to enjoy a little escapism for an enchanting couple of hours.
What's stunning about Peter Jackson's film is the way he has married computer-generated special effects with the extravagantly varied landscapes of New Zealand to create a mythical kingdom. I don't think I have seen anything so epic and visionary since the silent films of Fritz Lang--and they were made entirely within the studios and under artificial light. Tolkien-maniacs may dispute the adaptation, but it is beyond question that a huge imaginative translation has been made. You believe in these characters, you yearn to be part of their quest. And when the film ends--with two characters setting off across a sombre lake in a small boat--you want to be told you can come back next week for another three hours.
Will it play like Harry Potter? I don't know. There are passages here with subtitles; it's hard to recall the names of every character; the first hour is leisurely. But The Lord of The Rings is the real thing--a movie sensation. it's made my Christmas already.
Maybe, maybe not. There are several things going against LOTR.
First of all, HP was driven by kids who loved the HP Books. Plus their moms viewd HP as fun, non offensive material.
Second, HP had wider commercialzation prior to release. Toys had been in stores even before the filming began.
Third, studio hype. It's not that New Line HASN'T hyped LOTR, but they've hyped it to a pretty narrow - IMO - demographic.
Fourth, and this is just a personal bias, I think A LOT of parents waited for HP, saving discretionary income for that special day/week. HP opened big, dropped off pretty big as well. Oceans 11 beat it this weekend. Thing is, parents who had to choose between HP or LOTR probably gave the nod to HP. As a result, and again I don't know how big an effect it is, I think money spent on HP won't be available to take a family to LOTR.
And then there's the "violence/scariness" issue. Lots of kids under 12 who went to see HP probably won't be going to LOTR because their parents have heard - even in the enthusiastic reviews - about arrows in eyes, graphic battle scenes, etcetera.
That doesn't even take into account some of the scenes that might cause kids to sleep with the lights on. For instance even my 11 year old son, who has been exposed to a lot of stuff through his older siblings, came to me about the scene in the trailer where Frodo and Sam hide from the Ringwraiths. As they crouch under a tree, the Raith's hand sweeps past. I have no idea why, but it shook him.
Finally, and again it's just an opinion, I think lots of people, especially women, have no desire to expose their kids or themselves to orcs and Raiths, and all the other dark creatures of Middle Earth. HP was about as deep as they'd willingly go into that forbidding realm.
I hope your correct. It would be wonderful for LOTR to get the opening it so deserves. But from what I've heard from the Mom's and other women in my area, not to mention not just a little input from listeners at the woman oriented radio station where I work, quite a few don't care a whit about JRRT, LOTR, or anything of that genre. Instead they're ready for a "Fried Green Tomatos".
Personally it's my view that while quite a few women do appriciate JRRT, and even greater number don't have the mental acumen to grasp it. "The Hobbit" was about as far as their attention span allowed their interest journey.
prisoner6
WHAT FABULOUS BOOKS. You know they are good when you cry because Fili and Kili died trying to save Thorin.
I can't wait for the movie.
LOL! Yeah, that's hilarious. I wonder if any heads rolled?
But does it really matter how much it grosses?
Not at all. It's amazing to me that the film(s) were actually completed and apparently as complete in Tolkein Spirit as possible.
But, I might add at something like a hundred million a film, these movies will reap HUGE profits no matter how many opening night screens. And I think their legs will far outdistance HP.
prisoner6
How many hobbits does it take to change a light bulb?
One to complain that the light bulb isn't working, Five to hold a meeting to decide what to do about it, Twenty to form an expedidtion to the fabled Lightbulb mines of Mythrill, Thirty to throw a going away party, One to ask Gandalf for directions, One to sell into slavery when the petty cash runs out, Five to get lost through natural wastage (bandits, murderers, monsters etc), One to thrown to the Dragon that guards the Lightbulb mine, Two to carry the lightbulbs, Five to find a large, sword-welding barbarian to escort the lightbulbs home, Thirty to throw a safe return party, Five to find an elf tall enough to change the lightbulb, Five to compose ballads of daring, heroism, sacrifice and lightbulbs, Finally another two-hundred to appear in the subsequent Tolkien books.
Here's hoping that Jackon has got it right.
Regarding the release of LOTR:FOTR. It's opening in 10,000 cinemas worldwide next week. Whether that'll be enough to gross a lot of dollars/pounds/etc remains to be seen.
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.