In Reply to: Lord of the Rings! posted by anson on December 18, 2001 at 14:18:28:
Saw it last night.I am very pleased with the results. Not completely, more on that later, but given the constraints of putting fantasy on film, a pleasant result.
Three hours was a bit long, but I didn't really notice the time going by, although a lady in front of me got up to go to the bathroom just before Gandalf's Balrog scene! Guess she couldn't wait any longer.
The omission of the Barrow Wrights and Tom Bombadil was sad. But I guess that would have added another half hour to an already long show.
Pete Jackson did an excellent casting job. Everyone was spot on, I even approved of Elron, although he was a bit too militant for my tastes.
The special effects were a bit over the top sometimes, especially with Galadriel as 'dark queen', but overall reasonably subdued. This is not an FX movie.
Now. The bad parts.
Adding 'comic relief' with Gandalf banging his head in hobbit holes, well, not really needed. Not even for character development.
I agree that Tolkein was a bit mysogynist, but still there were several strong female roles in the book. However, Jackson's idea to expand the love interest between Arwen and Aragorn was just too much. There was a five minute scene ripe for cutting that had them lovey-doveying in Rivendell. And this crap about her losing her immortality. Puhleez.
The 'fight' between Saruman and Gandalf, not to mention the whole re-writing of Saruman. I think were wizards to fight, it would not be throwing each other about with spells from their staffs. And they didn't fight (in the book), Gandalf was duped. No exact explanation, but something as simple as, 'Step into this room while I get us a spot of tea' and locking the door on the way out would have been better.
Rivendell, and Galadriel, was a disappointment. This was the last refuge of Elves on Middle Earth, and it looked like a gloomy forest. And Galadriel should have been drop dead gorgeous. And kind. And stern. And beautiful. And powerful. Here was one juicy female role for the movie and Jackson flubs it.
The end, where Boromir scares Frodo into running away. There was supposed to be suspense there about the fate of all, and powerful indecision on Aragorns part as to what to do. This was a cliff hanger of the strongest type in the book (which by virtue of reading them twenty years after their publication I was not victim of) and the movie has a lot of 'loose ends' neatly wrapped up.
Parts I liked:
the ring sequences. Excellent interpretation.
Bree.
Rivendell.
Moria.
The acting was somewhere between first and second rate, but the characters were strong enough to carry it.
All in all this was as good as I hoped for, and in many places even better.
Would anyone not familiar with the books want to see it? I suppose so, but it would go from four stars to two or three for them.
I plan on seeing it again this coming week, and snarfing up the DVD as soon as it's available.
r
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Lord of the Rings! (spoilers!) - darkstar 08:04:50 12/22/01 (10)
- Re: Lord of the Rings! (spoilers!) - Joe S 15:03:06 12/30/01 (3)
- willful blindness - ishmael 14:05:24 01/01/02 (2)
- Re: willful blindness - Joe S 18:21:39 01/02/02 (1)
- Re: willful blindness - ishmael 11:23:41 01/04/02 (0)
- Re: Agreed!! - Larry S 17:43:29 12/23/01 (0)
- I agree with your positive review, but find fewer faults. - Audiophilander 22:43:02 12/22/01 (2)
- Re: I agree with your positive review, but find fewer faults. - ishmael 14:12:10 01/01/02 (1)
- Re: I agree with your positive review, but find fewer faults. - edta 21:03:14 01/05/02 (0)
- 4 stars for newbies - Harmonia 09:27:39 12/22/01 (1)
- As a non Tolkien reader - yata 10:55:40 12/22/01 (0)