(visually) impressive

Rating: 9/10 (1 April 2002)

OK, this comment is not going to add anything dramatically new, but I recently had a discussion with somebody about why "A Beautiful Mind" won all major Oscars instead of this movie. I still think that is unfair.
OK, in term of story this movie is very shallow: It's basically a very long chase. But that's mainly because it's so true to the book, and the book is many times more boring then the movie. Some people claim also that this movie has a lot of cliches, but don't forget that those things weren't cliches when the book was written and might have never become cliches without the book. In terms of character development, I've seen much better movies but also a lot poorer movies. Some characters are underdeveloped, but in order to develop them properly the movie would have had to last 10 hours...
What is left is a visual and technical masterpiece. Everything, from the costumes to the make-up, from the landscapes to the CGI and the cinematography, looked simply perfect. Yet even in some of these categories Lord of the Rings didn't win the oscars. And, contrary to my expectations, the movie was also really exciting and suspenseful. True, there are some parts were everything succumbs under too many effects (the Mines of Moria), but it's not nearly as problematic as in Episode I for instance.

When you look at the sheer size and scope of this production, you have to be deeply impressed. Even though it's lacking in story and character development, it should have easily won the "Best Picture" award, let alone the "Best Male Actor in Supporting Role" for Ian McKellen as Gandalf.

***1/2 out of **** stars