Pure Romance (in the original sense of the word)

Rating: 8/10 (3 August 2002)

As I begin this review, I feel the need to do something I have never done before: preface my comments. A quick glance at the first twenty-five or so reviews proved that people seem to have extremely strong feelings about this film. Many have gone so far as to accuse their opponents of being one type of person or another, to label people who do or do not like LoTR of being "stupid" or "nerds," etc. This is, first of all, extremely surprising to me, and I will try not to do that in what follows. Second, I am a female student of literature, with very strong feelings and standards for films and books. Finally, I rated this film an 8 out of 10 (which is really quite high on my scale).
Over the weekend, I was able to preview the DVD (which contains many excellent special features, as far as DVD's go), and so I watched the film two more times (I had already seen it in the theater). I was struck, again, by its daring nature. Unlike many action/fantasy films, LoTR is story and character driven. Although the special effects are marvelous and there are action/battle sequences galore, this is a film that depends on a story - and that story is fore most in the film's vision. Many have complained about the wooden nature of the dialog and characters, but I would strongly disagree. Yes, it is of a fairly simple nature, but the story is almost a fairy tale with mythic proportions. The script isn't bound to win any awards (I don't think it won any awards, actually), but functions as it needs to, and it is the way that it is for a reason - think about it the next time you watch LoTR (which I hope you will again regardless of how you felt about it the first time!). I also think the acting is, above all, entertaining. Each of the characters fulfills the physical requirements and then fleshes this out with wonderful touches of the voice, nuanced gestures, etc. Clearly, the story is not a character study and two more films remain to fill out the skeletons we now have and touch up the shadows. Accept what is before you as the first third of something, not the end all. This leads me to my next point: in order to garner the maximum value from both literature and film, I find it helpful to think about them as two separate entities. Things may be accomplished in books due to the genre that CANNOT be accomplished in film, and vice-versa. If a film were to be made that included every aspect of Tolkien's wonderful book, it would be approximately ten hours in length. Conversely, if a book were to be written based on Peter Jackson's film, it would be thousands of pages in length. It simply cannot be done. For this reason, consider the book source material, note differences, ponder them, but pawn most of them off to genre conventions - and then move on. One of the best things about film has that literature cannot is image, and the images in LoTR are amazing; the locations are simply spectacular and the cinematography deserved every accolade it received, and then some. Despite a few obviously mattes and the occasional cartoonish nature of the CGI, even the effects blended in seemlessly. This a world with heightened reality (along with the incredible "Moulin Rouge!") that truly stretched the boundaries of cinema as we now know it. Leave worn out films like "A Beautiful Mind" and the horrible "Monster's Ball" behind, LoTR is (hopefully!) the future.
Although I could say quite a bit more about my reaction to the film, I find there is only one thing left that has not already been said (at least as far as I have read). The original definition of "romance" is a fictious tale of wonderful and extraordinary events, characterized by a nonrealistic and idealistic use of the imagination. These stories were usually episodic and were designed to instill a sense of wonder and awe to the viewer/reader (look in a dictionary if you don't believe me!). If I can make one point about LoTR, it would be that I left the theater/turned off my VCR excited. The romance made me feel like a child; I was exhilarated. I enjoyed this film in the same way I enjoyed the books (nearly a decade ago). I do not look at one and expect to find the other, I appreciate them both for their distinctive merits.
I do not expect this review to change any one's minds (nor would I really want it to!). I guess I would just hope that we all keep an open mind when we watch films and recognize the man behind the curtain and love him for what he does to keep us all entertained~