Two Viewings and I'm Already "Bored of the Rings" (minor spoilers)

Rating: Null/10 (11 January 2002)

Watch out Lucas, there's a new insanely popular fantasy trilogy in town. Released almost years after the original classic books, Peter Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" is a hit with audiences and critics, but, having seen it more than once, I've found that it's overrated and just doesn't hold up. Though there are many things the film does very well, the "epic" battles are a letdown, and the story between manages to be at the same time engrossing and vague.
The film seems to focus too much on its battle/fleeing scenes. The only problem with this is that these sequences aren't terribly interesting, drawn-out in wide-open spaces and, because the apparently "invincible" fellowship members always survive against all odds without a scratch (excepting Frodo, whose death is teased several times), the scenes come off as anticlimactic and absurd as cut scenes from a video game like "Warcraft", especially given the presence of the Orcs and Goblins (which look good, but nothing that can't be seen on "Buffy" every week). Only two of these sequences evoke the slightest bit of thrilling suspense and intensity: one taking place in the claustrophobic confines of a collapsing stairwell, and one in which a member of the fellowship is shown a trace of mortality in battle for the first time.
Although the story does draw one in by finding a way to tie in bits and pieces of all the characters' past, none of the fellowship of supporting characters is given enough of a back story for the audience to know or care a lot about them. Barely enough background is given on the human characters that one can figure out the conflicts between them and their lust for the ring's power, and a (forbidden?) romance between Strider the ranger and Arwen the elf is given but a few minutes' time. Another example is when the fellowship's resident dwarf uncovers a startling revelation along the journey, but it's hard to empathize with him when its not until after the movie that one gets time to think and fully understand what the revelation was and why it was so shocking. Multitudes of names, characters, and locations are dropped throughout the film, and to say the least, its difficult to connect to and keep track of them all (though this has less to do with the film itself than watching without having read the story beforehand).
Though "Lord of the Rings'" plot and battle scenes aren't its high points, the one thing the film does exceptionally well is convey a sense of scale. Through trick camera angles and set design, Elijah Wood and his fellow hobbits don't just look smaller than everything else in their world, they ARE smaller. Conversely, the towering fortresses and mines of the evil Sauron and his henchmen menacingly overshadow everyone and everything. Scenes which showcase these brilliant CGI settings, with the cameras climbing and showing off these dark heights are the film's awe-inspiring moments (alongside equally trippy effects sequences when Frodo is in the "ring's world"), and unfortunately they don't last long.
All this criticism isn't to say that its a terrible film; like any effects-laden blockbuster, it is thoroughly enjoyable and awesome the first time. Unfortunately, upon multiple viewings, the immediate impression of the special effects wears off, and the film's problems stuck out like a sore thumb. Since I've been told the film is incredibly faithful to its source, its probably easier to enjoy being a fan of the books first. I know I plan on reading them before the other films are released so I might appreciate them more.