"Bored of the 'Rings'"
by Scott Mantz

"The Lord of the Rings:
The Fellowship of the Ring"
Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen
Directed by Peter Jackson

Band of brothers! Sean Astin, Elijah Wood, Dominic Monaghan, and Billy Boyd join the Fellowship in the first chapter of "The Lord of the Rings"

I don't know, maybe it's just me...

....but I never got into the whole "Lord of the Rings" thing. Sure, I remember watching the cartoon version of "The Hobbit" on TV when I was a kid, but as much as I hate to admit it, I never came within an inch of reading any of J.R.R. Tolkien's classic books. I can certainly relate to the passion behind the mythology--especially since I'm so passionate about another mythology (that would be "Star Trek")--but for me, the long-awaited big screen adaptation the first chapter in "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy, "The Fellowship of the Ring," was just another movie that I was looking forward to seeing.

After all, what's not to look forward to? From a cinematic standpoint, "The Lord of the Rings" was one of the biggest gambles in Hollywood history. New Line Cinema committed almost $300 million to shoot all three films back-to-back, and despite notable big screen credits to his resume, director Peter Jackson was a relatively unknown in the big-budget Hollywood ballpark. Principle photography in New Zealand lasted a whopping 274 days over the course of 15 months. Oh, and did I mention the hard-core group of loyal fans who were waiting with incredible anticipation to see if their beloved books would be done justice by the Hollywood hitmaking machine?

The verdict? Well, let me start off by saying that "The Fellowship of the Ring" is easily the most beautifully shot film I've ever seen. Between the picturesque cinematography to the incredible special effects to the lavish costume design, it's safe to say that every penny of its $90 million budget was well spent. Actually, considering how magical, breathtaking, and sublime the movie is, $90 million is a relative bargain. On the other hand, given that Jackson had the unenviable task having to explain so much about Tolkien's world, it's hard not to be overwhelmed by the tremendous amount of information being thrown at you. Now once again, since I didn't read any of the "Rings" books, I'm just analyzing the film from the standpoint of a clueless moviegoer. So, be warned...

A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way (well, OK, so maybe it wasn't in a galaxy far, far away, but it was definitely a long time ago), an enormous battle took place over the possession of an all-powerful ring, which in the wrong hands, could spell doom for the peaceful citizens of Middle Earth. By some miracle, it found its way to Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm), a friendly Hobbit who eventually passed it onto his nephew Frodo (Elijah Wood). The naive Frodo is coaxed by the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen) to embark on an incredible journey to Mordor, the only place where the ring can be destroyed once and for all. With the help of his best friends, Frodo must fight hoards of evil-doers and overcome incredible obstacles--including the irresistible power of the ring--if he is going to restore peace and save his world once and for all.

There's no doubt that "Fellowship" is a complex fantasy epic in every sense of the word, but it's underlying theme--the battle between good and evil--couldn't be much simpler. Actually, given that Tolkien's 1,000-plus page trilogy preceded another trilogy--the "Star Wars" trilogy--by more than 20 years, it's easy to see where George Lucas got much of his inspiration. In fact, the similarities between the two projects are hard to ignore. Frodo's internal struggle to resist temptation from the ominous power of the ring recalls Luke Skywalker's constant battle to resist the dark side of the Force in "Star Wars." The all-knowing, all-wise father figure Gandalf, who teaches Frodo without actually forcing him to do anything, easily recalls the teacher-protege, father-son bond between Luke and Obi-Wan Kenobi. The list continues, but why spoil the fun?

OK, now the bad news (and the sacrilege!). One can only imagine Jackson's desire to incorporate so many elements of the book into the film, and while that may please true believers, I'm not too sure that it was good for the movie. Maybe it's just me, but I was so overwhelmed by the barrage of information as to who was doing what to whom and why, I found myself somewhat disconnected and--dare I say it--bored by the progression of events. Also, as breathtaking as the battle sequences were, there were so many in such a steady succession, they became redundant and lost their sense of urgency.

As far as the cast is concerned, Jackson couldn't have picked a better Fellowship. Elijah Wood is so perfectly cast as Frodo, you would think that he rehearsed his whole life just to make this movie. The same goes for Ian McKellen, whose Gandalf is so commanding and wise, he could run "rings" around Alec Guiness's Obi-Wan Kenobi. Liv Tyler and Cate Blanchett show up in brief, but crucial roles as elves who help the Fellowship on their journey, and Viggo Mortensen gives his strongest performance yet as the protective, soft-spoken, sword-wielding Aragorn.

"The Fellowship of the Ring" has the most effective non-ending for an epic since 1980's "The Empire Strikes Back," and like that film, "Fellowship" will leave fans hungry for the next chapter. As for me, the over-abundance of information that tarnished this "Ring" will hopefully leave way for a more polished and cohesive film the next time around (which in this case, is exactly one year away. That's when part two of the series--the ominously titled "The Two Towers"--hits theaters). As for "The Fellowship of the Ring," I guess I need to see it again. Now that I've had time to absorb all the information, maybe I can actually enjoy it the next time around. As for my first viewing, I can't help it. I was just bored of the "Rings."

But then again, maybe it's just me.

Back to Scott's New Movie Reviews

Review Archives