Best of Jackson's "Ring" Films. A worthy adaptation

Rating: 8/10 (6 March 2008)

WARNING! Possible spoilers ahead
I must also provide a double warning: this is not an impartial review, as I am a fan of the three "Lord of the Rings" books, and my views of Jackson's movie will reflect on how it compares to those books (few reviews are impartial, but this one will be especially biased based on my enjoyment of the books).
Jackson made a huge gamble by investing millions of dollars to adapt J.R.R. Tolkien's fantasy epic "The Lord of the Rings" as three movies, one for each book (partitioned by publishers because of its girth), each made back to back. Usually, sequels are made only after the preceding movie has been successful. LOTR offers no such luxury, as the story is just too big for one film alone, which really left Jackson no choice but to make a block of movies at once, and pray that each one would make a profit (not to mention the fact that Tolkien's magnum opus could not be done well if squished together like ten tomatoes in a single can, and, as was the case in the publishing world, would have to be broken up so that people could take in all the detail clearly). As we all know, Jackson's gamble paid off; but are his movies as good as the massive media hype would have us believe?
Of the three LOTR, "The Fellowhip of the Ring" is closest to Tolkien's book, and properly sets the stage for the next two stories. All of the main characters are presented smoothly, and the viewer becomes acquainted with them over time and comes to appreciate the struggles they have to go through. The novel is fat with extraneous scenes and constant references to Tolkien's broader mythology surrounding Middle Earth (Tom Bombadil is an obvious example, as are the poems concerning Beren and Luthien Tinuviel), and it is understandable that one would not want to add this as part of a movie adaptation. Jackson made a very wise choice in excising those parts in favor of a smoother, slicker pacing, and adherence to the main plot, which concerns the Ring of Power. Adherence to these otherwise superfluous scenes would have damaged the narrative on the big screen. The movie is three hours simply by focusing on the main plot, and Jackson thankfully spared us some of the more byzantine portions of Tolkien's narrative.
Jackson's "Fellowship" is thankfully short on long, drawn-out action scenes, which was the main problem as far as fanatics of the novel and purists are concerned. This is less of the big-budget action movie the remaining two "Ring" films are, and more of an observation of the dark themes of the book. For this, Jackson's efforts are commendable.
The acting is done quite well. Ian McKellan and Christopher Lee are the best in the movie as the good and evil wizards, respectively. The actors playing the hobbits are fairly decent, as are those playing the human, elvish, and dwarfish characters. They maintain their good acting skills throughout the other two films, which makes them watchable. Tolkien fans and average movie-goers will not be disappointed with this engaging fantasy movie.