Blew me away.

Rating: Null/10 (2 January 2002)

The science fiction and fantasy genres are not generally taken
seriously; this is not without justification. It is all too easy to distract the non-discerning moviegoer from a bad film with beautiful actors, formulaic plots, strange weapons and gadgets, plenty of action and/or sex, and the odd latex prosthetic and weird, yet revealing, costume.
Fellowship of the Rings is not such a film. In fact, in the first draft of this review (which I lost), I realized that it is better off being compared to a film like Casablanca. I know some of you are cringing, but let me elaborate.
For me, a good film does not require an original plot (or even a plot), nor must it be very intellectual or difficult to grasp. It should have something in it for nearly everyone - maybe a little action, maybe a little adventure, maybe some romance, some subtlety and sophistication, and something to say. There should be layers of enjoyment and meaning, and each time you see it, you should find something new or interesting about it. There should be a careful attention to detail that may not be obvious except after repeated viewings. A great film has all of these, and then it blows you away. All aspects of the film show the same excellent care and attention as the others - none are shortchanged.
Casablanca never was meant to be the film phenomenon it became. It was one of those films that was thrown together after World War II was over and filmed a relatively short period of time with not a lot of money. However, like all great films, it just outdid itself.
Here we have the story of a few previously insignificant people who are now sucked into a situation of gargantuan importance. The hero knows that doing the right thing will mean a loss of comfort and familiarity, someone he loves, and quite possibly his own life. Doing the wrong thing means a victory for a great evil and unimaginable suffering for countless others, both strangers and friends. He has also never done this sort of thing before, and it's the hardest choice he's ever made in his life. In spite of all this, he makes the right choice. One of the subtler points of the film in my view is how even the least of us have the capacity for greatness of heart.
The film itself hits us where the heart is. We are compelled by the humanity and context of his situation. The actors take a script that is not particularly profound and give it impact and meaning through their delivery. We forget who they are in real life and for awhile see the characters as real. There is a chemistry among the players that makes this easy for us to do. After the film is over, we realize that only a great director could pull a performance like this from everyone, and create such an irresistible vision. Only a great film crew could get the shots the director needs to complete his vision. Only a great casting director could put together a group of people that well-suited for their parts and each other . We realize that the cinematography was so good and so fitting a part of the story that we didn't notice it until the film was over. We must see it at least once more to catch the things we barely noticed, or missed completely, the first time. We didn't notice we had been sitting down for this long.
I could have written those same two paragraphs about Fellowship of the Ring, almost without alteration. I didn't want it to end. I must see it again. The Balrog was more terrifying than I ever imagined, and the dire circumstances of the Fellowship was illustrated so well that I found myself almost wondering if they would make it. This is one of the hallmarks of a great film - it's just as compelling and hard-hitting every time; __it doesn't matter that you know the story__.
Peter Jackson has outdone himself, and in that, he caused his actors and crew to do so as well. I went into the film expecting it to be good, even excellent, and my expectations were surpassed by far. I have no problems with the liberties taken with the story as part of transferring it to the filmic experience. I do not think that these differences disrupted the story. I actually liked better the interaction between Sam and Frodo, as I have always had a problem with the subservience and deference that Sam shows in the book. The scenery was magnificent, the colors, stunning. Boromir's inner conflict was exceptionally well played - I sympathized more with him in the film than in the book. Everything was fantastic, yet not so much as to seem wholly unreal. Jackson thought carefully about the psychological impact of color, lighting, costuming, and other aesthetic elements, before choosing anything, and also he cared about getting Tolkien's original intent across in the film. Any change that was made was made with this intent in mind, and it shows.
The omission of the Tom Bombadil thread is unfortunate, because it's fun, but it is certainly not a required part of the tale. Tolkien himself said that the point of Tom and Goldberry was to show how some in Middle Earth were not only completely unaffected by the main events of the Trilogy, but also uninterested, so we don't really have to care about them, either.
Fellowship of the Ring is a great film. I think that with time, it will probably be listed as one of the best. Even if it isn't, I don't care. I loved this film so much that I would write this exact review even if I were the only person who loved it, even if Roger Ebert called me personally just to berate me for comparing it to Casablanca and to tell me what horrible taste I have, so I'm giving it a ten anyway.