I wanted to like it.. but

Rating: Null/10 (20 December 2001)

I wanted to like the first installment of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. I think Elijah Wood is a terrific actor. I liked Sean Astin in "Goonies" and "Rudy". John Rhys-Davies was tip-top in the Indiana Jones films. And J.R.R. Tolkien's tales of Middle Earth seemed the perfect canvas for the palate of today's computer graphic technology. So why was I disappointed?
I never read the books. While other kids were reading the Rings, I was into C.S. Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia. So I came to the movie without preconceived notions about the story, prepared for the magic of Tolkien to wash over me.
It didn't.
Not that the visuals were not stunning. You can see every penny of the millions that New Line spent on the film in the special effects. But now that we've seen the Matrix and interminable Star Wars installments, some of this is beginning to look a little derivative. You're inclined to yell `Mummy Returns' when you see the battle sequence at the beginning and the multiple matte / CGI scenes scream out `Return of the Jedi'. Why? Perhaps it's because Peter Jackson tried too hard to be faithful to the details of the novels. There is so much ground to cover that we never really get in touch with the story.
Effects don't connect you with characters. Scripts and actors do. And for me, it just didn't happen. For those who haven't read the novel, here's the Readers Digest:
There are a bunch of rings. Some good, one REAL bad. After a fierce battle the real bad guy with the real bad ring is killed. The victor knows he must destroy the ring, but he is seduced into keeping it, leading to generations of pain as the ring seeks it's reincarnated bad guy master. Along the way Bilbo (Ian Holm) gets hold of the ring, subsequently passing it on to Frodo (Elijah Wood), who realizes with the guidance of a wizard (Ian McKellen) that he must take it to the one place where it can be destroyed. Various species gather as a "fellowship" to protect and deliver Frodo to his destiny. But the ghost of the bad guy is at work, throwing road blocks at every corner.
Elijah Wood understands the Hollywood adage that `you act with your eyes'. In Rings, he tries his darnedest to show us how much he feels the burden of being the ring bearer, the only one alive who can break the curse of the ring by destroying it. It almost works. Liv Tyler and Cate Blanchett are attractive window dressing, but they are stuck with dialogue that tries to convey depth and detail that we don't feel. I kept thinking of `That Thing You Do', expecting Tom Everett Scott to pop out of the forest and ask Liv when she was last decently kissed.
The best performance in the film is Ian McKellen's Gandalf. His nuanced wizard is excellent. And Christopher Lee provides his usual menace as Gandalf's master. But the rest of the film is too predictable: Hero takes on a task and faces obstacles. His friends try to help. Some succeed, some fail. There are bad guys and battles, and attractive women who inspire the good guys to keep going. Each plot turn can be seen a mile away. Someone says, `Don't throw rocks into that pool,' and a moment later there's a serpent.
And then there's the ending.
After sitting for almost three hours we learn we have to pay again and sit some more to find out what will happen. It was a let-down. I wanted a little more closure in return for my $6.75 and my numb rear end. Frodo tells Sean Astin's character how glad he is that they are together and a martyred good guy gets a psudo-burial-at-sea. Where's the climactic battle and associated plot resolutions?
Here's my guess: At end of the third picture, Frodo will reach the volcano and destroy the ring. The prince will be tested, and unlike his dad, he'll pass. His love interest may or may not survive (she's mortal now, remember?). The Hobbits will dance and rejoice upon their return to their beloved shire. Frodo will become the stuff of legend and the king will rule with wisdom all the days of his life.
We'll know by the middle of next week whether Fellowship of the Ring will have the legs to live up to the critical hype. I hope so. I like risk-taking directors and studios who are willing to spend the bucks to bring good literature to the screen. But this one left me empty.