Despite pearls of filmmaking, disappointing to the faithful

Rating: Null/10 (26 December 2002)

I went into Fellowship fully expecting to hate it. I love the books and have read them countless times and know the plots, characters, and even the back stories from Simarillion. Therefore, as I had never seen a book-made-movie that didn't butcher the original, I was ready to rant against the movie. But a funny thing happened: I LOVED IT. Though there were small changes and even large changes, Fellowship stayed true to the vision of Tolkien and brought the story to life quite fantastically.
Having made all three movies at the same time, I am astounded that Jackson could have hit a homerun with one and failed so miserably (and blatantly) to follow through on Two Towers. I don't deny that it was visually stunning and, if I hadn't read the books I probably would have adored Towers more than Fellowship. And I also believe that much of the movie was wonderful and stayed true to Tolkien's vision. However, there were glaring aberrations that frankly ruined the movie for me.
First and foremost was the TERRIBLE portrayal of Faramir's character. The entire plot of that storyline was changed. Faramir is in Ithilien precisely because he was nothing like his brother Boromir. He never attempts to take the ring, and in fact in the book he makes a point of saying that he knows how corrupting it is - Faramir as a character is closest to Aragorn in temperament. He aids Frodo and Sam on their way, despite knowing that his father (Denethor the Steward of Gondor) will hate him for it. Incidentally, the premise that he takes Frodo and Sam all the way to Osgiliath, where the Wraith sees Frodo and Frodo nearly gives him the ring is absurd, as Sauron would have sent every resource at his command to get the ring at that point - Frodo and Sam's only hope is that Sauron doesn't notice them!)
Frankly, I have to say I could have lived much more easily with the other changes: elves at Helm's Deep, the decision to have Aragorn nearly die and appear at the last moment, and the back story of Arwen and Elrond (which ends, bizarrely, with Arwen leaving for the Grey Havens???!!! - I'm interested to see how Jackson extracts her from that), if the prior complaint hadn't made the other changes that more glaring. Unlike some, I understand why Towers did not end with Shelob and the confrontation between Gandalf and Saruman at Orthanc - Return of the King is actually the shortest of the books in text (much of the printed book is actually appendices), and I find it plausible that these issues can be addressed satisfactorily in the next movie (though, if they are omitted at that point I will be sorely disappointed).
All told, this is a movie that is good for folks who do not remember the book well, have not read the book, and/or don't really care about Tolkien's vision one whit. I plan to see it again to take it in without the horrified shock I experienced during my first viewing, but I really don't understand why Jackson strayed so far - in many places where the original story added much more depth and would not have detracted from the excitement of the movie or required any additional explanation.
I still hold out hope for the final movie, as there were so many pearls in this movie (the Ent's razing of Orthanc was spectacular, the actors portrayed the characters with passion and heart, Gollum was fantastically conceived, and the schizophrenic nature of the book was nicely woven together), but on the whole I was sorely disappointed.