Dishonest Hollywood fluff

Rating: 3/10 (3 January 2005)

Due to popular demand, some of the reasons why Lord of the Rings is a poor film :
This movie is so stifled by nonsense and Hollywood tricks that it's hard to discern, beneath it, the work of a purportedly intelligent, talented, and celebrated author beneath it.
To begin with: there are way too many closeups in this movie. Why couldn't Peter Jackson simply let us stand back and watch the characters behave? Why does the camera have to keep poking into the characters' faces, looking for subtle clues? Maybe Jackson's been spending too much time watching the moronic trash of Spielberg, the most overrated director of all time who still hasn't learned how to let go of the audience's hand.
The melodramatic soundtrack, far from sustaining or assisting the story, cheapens it and, as Spielberg is so adept at doing, leads me to believe that the intended audience is probably those people who don't like to think too hard. This film would've been far improved if Jackson had simply left out the lousy soundtrack.
The special effects generally do not add anything to the story.
And there is plenty of plain illogical nonsense in here. For one example, i think we can all agree that it's physically impossible for a human being to outrun an absolutely normal, healthy horse. If a person is being followed at full gallop by a horse, the horse will always catch up. Also, i always have trouble swallowing scenes wherein one or two people capably defeat an army of assailants counting ten, twenty, or more, unless these one or two heroes or heroines happen to have superhuman traits or at least an extraordinarily exceptional degree of training. I'm not aware of whether or not this sort of occurrence is consistent with the actual text, but as i watch the film, i can't help feeling lost in all of Jackson's nonsense.
And so much swooping! Why so much swooping? More Spielberg influence. I admit there's also swooping in Heavenly Creatures, but by now his swooping has become quite distracting. Why can't we just watch the characters? Isn't Jackson supposed to be telling us a story?
I like Jackson's earlier films, and Heavenly Creatures is a brilliant and compelling one, and clearly his best. But now he's off remaking King Kong... maybe he's gotten lost in Hollywood. Someone please help him find his way out!
Peter Jackson had the potential of making a great film which could've lasted many decades as a classic, but instead he made a sloppy moneymaker. What a loss.
But then again, perhaps this movie was made for children.
On the plus side, the pretty New Zealand landscapes are nice to look at.