The film is unlike the book, but both are great!

Rating: 10/10 (14 January 2002)

When I next read "The Lord of the Rings" this year, it will be the 40th time that I have begun the great and timeless adventure. I never thought that the gigantic work could be reduced to its barest essence and translated onto the screen with any kind of success. I was happily, ecstatically wrong. When I first read "The Lord of the Rings" some 25 years ago, I was stunned by the literary quality of Tolkien's writing. I hadn't thought that any creative writer could tell a story about weather and time better than Tolstoy, perhaps the greatest writer of naturalism, ever. Tolkien is the Russian master's superior in this regard. Since the New Line Cinema tease began early in 2001, I have waited with the greatest anticipation for "The Fellowship of the Ring." I shall not insult those who may read these lines by passing myself off as THE Tolkien expert, but I know every scene in the three "Rings" book by incident, if not by heart. I was ready for the absence of Tom Bombadil and Goldberry, as I was for that of such minor functionaries in the book like Fredegar "Fatty" Bolger, and Farmer Maggot. Peter Jackson got it right. He distilled the essence of the first book to make it watchable, and interesting, to those who may not have read the book, or may not have had a prior interest in Tolkien at all. As a dedicated reader of the book, I have my regrets. We'll have to wait almost a year until "The Two Towers" is released, but "The Fellowship of the Ring" revealed no clue as to whether or not Gimli and Legolas will become friends. I always thought the burgeoning comradeship between the prickly dwarf and the haughty elf, made possible by Galadriel's magnanimous and compassionate behavior towards Gimli when the bedraggled, demoralized Fellowship reaches Lothlorien, was one of the book's singular highlights. While I was disappointed that this was not explored in the film, the movie is a magnificent work. The casting is well-nigh perfect. I could not think of an improvement upon Sir Ian McKellan's Gandalf, Christopher Lee's Saruman, Elijah Wood's Frodo, Viggo Mortensen's Strider/Aragorn, or Sean Bean's Boromir, if my very life depended upon it. While every Tolkien reader has his/her ideas of what certain locations must look like, the Chamber of Mazarbul in Moria struck me as a superb rendering of the ominous, stone-walled room. The computer graphics wonderfully displayed the Gates of Argonath and the Seat upon Amon Hen. Actually, the cinematic differences between Tolkien's words and Jackson's celluloid are many; however, Tolkien's lyrical prose is the payload for readers, just as film was for those sitting in the theater. This, finally: as I watched the film, the entire theater, full almost to bursting, was silent, engrossed. People didn't leave their seats for the bathroom or the popcorn stand. When credits began to roll, the audience sat silently for a moment; some burst into embarrassed, brief clapping. It seemed that the audience was indeed a fellowship, and an ennobled one, at that.