Brave gamble pays off

Rating: Null/10 (10 July 2002)

I've never seen a movie that looks quite like this. The mixture of exquisite art direction, makeup and costume design elements, incredible location photography, combined with computer effects and painted mattes (even a visual tribute to Harryhausen), renders one quite speechless.

It is a remarkably faithful adaptation of the 1st book of Tolkien's trilogy, FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING (as far as i can remember, having last read it 20 years ago.)
The casting is, by and large, excellent: · Sir Ian McKellan is one of the greatest actors alive, and gives the wizard Gandalf surprising depth and emotional resonance. · Ian Holm is, as always, a welcome presence, and makes Bilbo a complex character in very little screen time. · Viggo Mortensen, he of the chiseled chin, is somebody I've only ever seen in bad, low-budget action films. He is absolutely convincing as the heroic king-in-exile, Aragorn. This could really make him a star. · Elijah Wood's eyes express the pain of the burden Frodo Baggins must carry, along with his resolve to do what is required. It is a subtle, moving performance, childlike and innocent, without self-consciousness or condescension. · The other hobbits are less interesting. Boromir is obvious. John Rhys-Davies' Dwarf Lord leaves little impression. The elves, beautifully designed, are modestly acted, except for Cate Blanchett's great cameo as Galadreal. Liv Tyler is, once again, beautiful and utterly devoid of talent. Christopher Lee is iconic as the betrayer, Saruman.
The battle scenes are inconsistent. Some are shakily and claustrophobically shot with little clarity or suspense, just sound and fury. And some are brilliantly staged set pieces, playing like extended arias. No one, however, should confuse director Peter Jackson with Michael Curtiz.

The music is pretty but forgettable. Enya's lyrical, Irish New-Agy elegies are too obvious a choice, and Howard Shore's bombastic battle music themes are as subtle as a sledgehammer.
You definitely FEEL the 3-hour running time. Judicious editing could have cut a 1/2 hour without damaging the story or characters. If I saw one more close-up of the ring in the palm of somebody's hand, being stared at with awe, I was going to scream. That's about 10 minutes right there.

The unavoidable structural problems of telling a story of this length, over the course of 3 films, are... regrettably un-avoided. The first 2 hours are almost pure exposition. The ending is abrupt and unsatisfying in its lack of closure. As I said, unavoidable problems... but they're there, nonetheless.
It was a really brave thing for NEW LINE CINEMA to finance the shooting of all 3 films at once ($270M and climbing), and then release them one year at a time. If this one wasn't a mega-hit, it could've sunk the studio. I'm glad the film did well, since this kind of gamble should be rewarded. They've financed writer/director Jackson's vision of Tolkien's classic works, allowing him to create a flawed, but beautiful, majestic epic about the hope, faith, and courage that resides within the hearts of even the humblest of us.
It shouldn't be missed.