A Beautiful and Heart-Breaking Movie

Rating: 10/10 (21 December 2001)

Here are a few words that describe this movie for me: audacious, tragic, memorable, infuriating, beautiful, and heart-breaking. Let me start with audacious. How dare Peter Jackson! How dare he change the Tolkien's sacred text. Where is Glorfindel? Where is that wonderful scene of Sam confronting Strider? And why wasn't Sam present at the Mirror of Galadriel? It's like making a movie of the birth of Christ and inserting a scene where Joseph and Mary are pursued by an army of Roman soldiers, until finding a hiding place in a cave. Hey, it may be an exciting episode, but it aint scriptural.
On the other hand, the Lord of the Rings is a work of fiction. It's a great work of art. When a movie is made from a book, there are two things that must be considered:
1) How does it compare to the book? 2) How does it stand by itself, as a work of art?
Let me tackle the first question. Simply put, the book is better. But then again, how could it not be? Was anyone really expecting that the movie would outshine the book? Simply impossible. That being said, there were some choices that Peter Jackson made that simply mystify and/or infuriate me. Let me start with the areas that I think the movie moved away from the book to its detriment:
1) The flight to Rivendell was too hasty and jarring. Merry and Pippin are never "officially" enrolled into Frodo's quest. They are simply caught up in the flight to Bree. This makes their presence seem like a mistake rather than an act of friendship. A similar problem occurs with Strider, who joins the company without that wonderful scene where the hobbits (and Sam, grudgingly) accept his presence. I can't understand why anyone would take these scenes out when they add so much depth to the characters.
2) What happened to the Elves? Rather than appearing high, fair, and noble, they often appear as petty and quarrelsome. Elrond is no better than any other man, he's just gifted with long life and a good memory. Heck, it appears his only concern is getting the ring out of Rivendell as fast as possible so he can finish packing on his way out of Middle Earth.
In the same vein, we see Lady Galadriel as Boromir might have seen her. But we have to see Galadriel also as Frodo sees her. We have to understand why Frodo would offer her the ring. In the context of the movie, it seems that he offers the ring because he's afraid of the quest, rather than because she is "wise and fair" and would be a "better" keeper than Frodo.
3) What happened to Lothlorien? I just finished reading the Lothlorien chapter to my son tonight and it bore no resemblance to what was presented in the movie. I want Lothlorien to be a place of surpassing beautiful and stillness; instead it look like a place with a bunch of tree houses in someone's psychedelic dream.
There are a few other areas that I cringed at, but these were the ones which made me shake my head in disbelief. People, people, people, WHAT were you thinking?

Ah, but now let me turn to question #2. Divorcing the movie from the book, and accepting it as a work of art on its own merits, it is a stunning achievement. When the Return of the King was published, a reviewer called it "beautiful and heart-breaking", the same words apply to the movie. Peter Jackson paints a vivid picture of a world in decay. The great cities and towers of the past have fallen. The Last Alliance has been sundered. The Elves are weary of the world and desire only to leave it to rot, and the Dark Lord has risen again.
And into this world comes a token of doom, the ring, and the one who seems chosen to rid the world of this evil is a simple hobbit. Frodo does not desire adventures or glory. When he learns of the ring, he first wants to hide it forever and then he wants, no PLEADS, for Gandalf to take it. Finally, because there is no other way, he reluctantly takes it to Rivendell, where he hopes that his job is finished and he can go home. But he soon realizes that there is no one would will take his burden from him, so he must continue. The cost is great. Bilbo is tempted to seize the ring, Gandalf perishes in the Mines of Moria, Boromir betrays him, and so, step-by-step Frodo becomes more and more isolated from the world. Frodo's haunted look as he watches the Fellowship fall apart around him, will stay with me a long time.
So too, will the friendship between Gandalf and Frodo. Ian McKellen's portrayal of Gandalf is perfection. He portrays a vulnerable Gandalf, one that knows there are indeed greater powers than himself in the world, and yet he forcing himself to go forward. His courage may even exceed Frodo's since he fully knows the dangers that awaits him, and Frodo does not. Mixed with his courage is a tenderness for the hobbits. When Frodo agrees to take the ring, Gandalf's face expresses both amazement and sadness. It's a wonderful characterization.
And finally, there is Aragorn, who in this movie, really is Strider. He is the man that we know will become the King of all Middle Earth, but he is not ready yet. He must grow into his Kingship. I was greatly moved when he let Frodo go into Mordor alone because he knew that could not trust himself to be near the Ring any longer. It was perhaps, his first kingly act. An act that Isildur could not do. The development of Aragorn may be one area in which the three movies will exceed the three books. We shall see.

I finished watching the movie eight hours ago. A part of me still dwells in the Middle Earth of Peter Jackson's invention. No, it is not as good as the book; but it is a great and heart-breaking movie, and after I recover, I intend to see it again.