A Tribute

Rating: 10/10 (27 December 2002)

To Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens,
Dwarf Lord and Ladies of the Southern Islands,
And to Their 3000 Sworn Companions,
Who from the Bottomless Depths of The World's Greatest Novel

Mined and Wrought The World's Greatest Movie,
My Humble Gratitude and Joyful Admiration.
*
Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings will forever set the standard for cinematic entertainment. Henceforth you cannot help but ask: was watching some other movie, TV show, sporting event, etc., a better use of your leisure time than re-watching a couple of hours of LotR? Probably not, especially once we get hold of the extended DVD versions.

* * * * *

To the naysayers out there:
Yeah, yeah, yeah -- I know the film's not perfect. Neither, for different reasons, is Tolkien's book. Get over it. [Just one example: in the book, Sam's speech is shot through with maritime references, natural to an Englishman, but no Shire hobbit had ever seen the sea.]

I give 4 derisive 'Bree Belches' to Roger Ebert's delicately fatuous and thoroughly erroneous critique of The Two Towers's supposed lack of faith to the trilogy, which he acknowledges he has never read. Well, I *have* read the books, about a dozen times in the past four decades (starting with the hardcover first edition in my high school library, when that was still the only edition), and I believe that Peter Jackson's movies are true to the heart, soul, and characters of the story, and that the liberties he took with the plot were warranted by the translation to film, and some are genuine improvements (e.g. replacing Glorfindel with Arwen). Ebert pompously claims, "The last third of the movie is dominated by an epic battle scene that would no doubt startle the gentle medievalist J.R.R. Tolkien," but the Battle of Helm's Deep is in fact just as big and dark and violent in the book as it is in the movie, and both are tame compared to what Tolkien would have experienced firsthand as a line officer on the Western Front in the Great War.
For a much more perceptive review, from another critic who has not read the books, check out Joe Morgenstern's column in the Wall Street Journal of 12/20/2002.
*
For others who like to obsess over details, consider this:
Six of the eight Middle-Earthly members of the Fellowship are princes of their people. Aragorn is heir to the throne of Gondor; Boromir the eldest son of its ruling steward. Legolas is the son and heir of Thranduil, king of the Mirkwood elves. Gimli is nephew to Thorin Oakenshield, dwarf king under the Lonely Mountain, and cousin (and therefore potential heir) to Balin, late lord of Moria. Merry is heir to the Thane of Buckland, while Pippin is in direct line of descent from the Old Took. Only Frodo and Sam are commoners -- a rich eccentric country squire and his devoted gardener, nostalgic timeless English characters singularly resonant for Tolkien's own shattered generation.
Jackson essentially omits this set-up from the movie. In the book it does not become important until after the fall of Sauron. Alas Jackson has stated that "The Cleansing of the Shire" will not be part of his Return of the King, though he was careful not to reveal what *will* be included. Narsil re-forged will play a part, one hopes. Elrond does set this up. And would zombie-master Jackson dare to delete the Paths of the Dead? One hopes not.