"This is it, this'll be the furthest I've ever been away from home" - Fails as a journey of self discovery but succeeds as an epic action film with other things going for it.

Rating: 7/10 (10 February 2008)

I suppose the one item at highest risk of aging in a film of this sort after several years is its CGI or its special effects; but thankfully this first Lord of the Rings film now comes across as a sort of fun and epic adventure film rather than a fantastic piece of film-making, the sort of which perhaps blinded people (and may still do now) into thinking they are seeing a fantastic film with great story telling and great action scenes. I'm a fan of the Indiana Jones films and I can enjoy films like The Mummy every once in a while and whilst this Lord of the Rings film is perhaps a level above these titles on a sense of scale, it is really nothing greater than that.
I think by the end of the film, it has confused itself. The narrative has become disjointed, the path the film looked like it was heading down has been ignored and characterisation has reached such a basic level that I'm sure there are theorists and critics out there who could have probably told you who would've died and who wouldn't have; even if they had no prior knowledge of the novel. By the time the credits have begun rolling, we have seen Frodo Baggins (Wood) go on a leg of a journey, making friends, allies and developing friendships along the way but the issues are the surprisingly lacklustre story and poor development of the rest of the fellowship. Legolas (Bloom) is a mere face; Boromir (Bean) is merely someone who is present to play out the role of the supposed 'spy in the camp' as he tries to goad the ring away from Frodo when he needs to; Gimli (Rhys-Davies) is another character who is placed, follows orders and fights when needed; also contributing to the film's inclusion of mediocre plot points when it is his idea to travel through the mines of Moria, a Dwarven kingdom and the other three hobbits are there for mere comedy. If you look at how the other three hobbits came into being in the fellowship, you'll see that Sam (Astin) was eavesdropping at a window and the other two were stealing crops from a field that Frodo and Sam just happened to be passing  these are pretty poor character introductions and the three are never developed beyond the butt of most jokes.
But what The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring lacks in characterisation; it makes up for in scale, vision, entertainment and ideas. The film also benefits from a good director; Peter Jackson it would seem knows how to make a good film and toy with his audience: Sam states that he though he'd lost Frodo at one point when he lags behind, only for the two other hobbits to come bursting out of the field and bump into both Frodo and Sam. Whilst the introduction is crude and it is played out for a cheap thrill, Jackson combines Sam's fear of loosing Frodo with the relief that he's caught up with him and then back to the fear that something will go wrong when two unknown subjects burst into the frame, forcing us and the characters to jump. Jackson also makes the film very early on seem upbeat and jovial; the characters are in possession of an item of Armageddon and yet the film has an upbeat and somewhat relaxed atmosphere to it. This is most evident when Bilbo (Holm) hosts his birthday party and everyone is seen to have fun in a relaxed and somewhat cheesy manner; the evidence is also there when Bilbo thanks everyone for coming and goes through his family members. But this is good directing because it lulls us into a false sense of security; everything is fine and upbeat early on and yet the film will delve deeper into a darker and more disturbed groove once the adventure has begun; dealing with obsession and madness through Gollum as well as tackling issues of trust and friendship between Frodo, Sam and the fellowship itself.
So during the birthday party, there are two examples that hint at this disturbing 'to-come' undertone: Bilbo's speech starts off jovial before turning 'dark' when he disappears but it turns out that was all a joke anyway; immediately returning to the film's jovial nature. The second example is when everyone is having fun; a firework in the form of a dragon swoops down on the hobbits, they start screaming and panicking but it flies over and explodes: everyone is happy again. These are mini-examples of the film overall displayed within the first third. There is also the clever atmosphere put across after the hobbits initially escape the hooded riders; they encounter an obnoxious gatekeeper and go to a rough pub  are they now safe from the riders? It seems not as nothing gets in these people's way. But the script and story is what lacks here, apart from basic logic at times. The hooded riders actually run away from the wave, rather than keeping on going or turning around and Gandalf (McKellen) does not mention the danger of the Balrog before going into Moria.
The film also suffers with its musical score; an unusual thing to be critical of. I've established the film begins in a light hearted manner but then grows darker and yet the score keeps a certain level of softness which culminates in the film actually ending in an upbeat manner. Two great friends have died and two more are taken but the film tiptoes around this, suggesting too obviously that "the adventure continues...." Whilst the film is fantastic in its broad and epic scale, it does not work on its own as a journey of self discovery for Frodo and Sam. The most interesting character is not the hero but Gandalf himself and when that is the case in a film like this, you are struggling in certain areas.