From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:34 2002 From: Christopher Null Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2001 03:28:40 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30379 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 269818 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 178 X-RT-AuthorID: 1062 X-RT-RatingText: 3.5/5 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30379 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 163 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!news1.ebone.net!news.ebone.net!unlisys!news.snafu.de!isdnet!sn-xit-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2342 rec.arts.sf.reviews:163 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING A film review by Christopher Null Copyright 2001 filmcritic.com You think Harry Potter had expectations? It's a beloved book, sure, but it was published in 1997. In 10 years it will be as forgotten as The Bridges of Madison County. But J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings dates all the way back to 1937, and it's taken all these decades for someone to even attempt a live-action recreation of the trilogy of books. And not without reason. How do you satisfy a legion of fans, some of whom have been waiting almost 65 years to see their absolute favorite work of literature put to film? More often than not, you don't, and though Peter Jackson's production of The Lord of the Rings is painstakingly faithful and earnest, it is almost a foregone conclusion that the movie will never be good enough for the obsessed fans (see also the 1978 animated Lord), just is it will be far too obtuse for those who haven't read the books. For the uninitiated, The Lord of the Rings is a trilogy of books that occur 60 years after the events of The Hobbit. A hobbit (read: little person with hairy feet) named Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), nephew of the famed Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm), is entrusted with a mysterious ring when Bilbo opts to take a permanent holiday, fading away from society after 111 years of life. How'd he get so old? That ring isn't just a band of gold. It's a magic ring forged of unspeakable evil -- evil that has finally awakened after centuries of dormancy... and now it wants its ring back. Of course, if that were to happen, you know, we'd have a reign of terror, end of the world, or some such stuff, so it's up to our miniscule hero and his band of merry men to do something about it. At the prodding of the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen, very aptly cast here), Frodo embarks on a quest -- first to get the ring far away from his peaceful home, then eventually agreeing to destroy it in the volcanic fires in which it was forged. He finds aid in the form of a band of unlikely henchmen: a few hobbits from home, including his best pal Sam (Sean Astin), the aforementioned Gandalf, a sophisticated elf (Orlando Bloom), a mean dwarf (John Rhys-Davis, wholly unrecognizable), and a couple of tough humans (including one who just so happens to be a king in exile (Viggo Mortensen)). And along the way they encounter bad guys sent by the evil Sauron (mostly a bunch of grotesque creatures), and good guys that help them out (mostly a bunch of elves, including characters played by Hugo Weaving, Liv Tyler, and Cate Blanchett). Will Frodo and his friends succeed, destroying the ring and saving the world of Middle Earth? Well, not in this movie, they won't. Though The Fellowship of the Ring is three hours long, we've still got a good six hours to go before any of this gets resolved. Purists are going to love the drama. Your average moviegoer is going to wet himself. To be sure, Jackson (director of numerous cult flicks and one of my favorite films, Heavenly Creatures) goes out of his way to make The Fellowship a film for the Tolkien-obsessed. Throughout the production, he has collaborated in depth with the fan base, though I imagine there's only so much fan interaction one can take before going completely postal. And in fact, some fans are still unimpressed -- one fan Web site even tried to launch a petition to get the studio to change certain details about Liv Tyler's character, citing a long list of reasons. Imagine their surprise when they discover she only has about five minutes of screen time, anyway! (Also by way of side note, the controversial theory that Sam is gay and is in love with Frodo gets considerable play here -- all that's lacking is a liplock and it's a done deal.) Now it's been a decade and change since I last cracked open a Tolkien book, but from what I remember, Jackson has treated the source material with considerable faithfulness. Ironically, this may work against the film at the box office -- with all the genealogies and more races than you can count (and will the average moviegoer understand that hobbits and halflings are the same thing?), Peoria may not be willing to suffer through three hours of an elaborate fantasy world just to be given the message that, well, power corrupts. Of course, The Lord of the Rings has been billed as an effects extravaganza, but overall, these are a considerable letdown after such a massive buildup. While the hobbitization effect -- which takes normal-sized actors and digitally shrinks them down to appropriate size -- is alarming at first, eventually you get used to it (though Astin's ringlets and chubby cheeks are just plain creepy). Hobbits aside, it's the obvious digital backdrops that start to wear you down. Our adventurers set out across countless picturesque vistas -- but when these are left untweaked, they look strikingly like New Zealand (where the film was shot). To offset this, Jackson inserts outrageous monuments into the background to build a fantasy world. When he adds simple ruins or rocky outcroppings, it works fine, but when it's an entire phony city, it just isn't believable, and that pulls you out of the story. If I see another movie (Star Wars: Episode I and Gladiator also abused this to an extreme) where a few digital birds go flying across the digital sunset over the digital buildings again, I'll puke. While the film is studded with action, the fights are not particularly well-choreographed, either. You don't get a good sense of scale of the big battles, and the in-close fighting is edited to frantically to follow well. (Thankfully, there are no Matrix-rip-off wire-flips or time-stopping tricks!) The exception to the rule is a fight between the gang and a giant troll, deep in the Mines of Moria. The troll is one of the best CGI monsters I've seen on film, and his battle sequence is put together perfectly. This scattershot quality extends throughout the film. Another example: The magic effects are alternately stellar and disappointing. While Gandalf's showdown with the demon Balrog is arguably the film's high point, his skirmish with rival Saruman (Christopher Lee, bearing a staff with what I swear is a golf ball on top) is pretty lame -- two old geezers just pointing their staffs at one another, which sends the other one flying against the wall, over and over again. It's hard to believe the sequences are from the same movie. With two-thirds of the story to go, it's difficult to judge the film on its own, so I'll be gentle this time out. Suffice it to say that fantasy fans will enjoy The Fellowship of the Ring, but most moviegoers will find it overly long and just too exhausting. Jackson may have some tricks up his sleeve for the sequels, but it's going to be tough for him to improve things much with The Two Towers, when the plot slows down and the highlight of the story includes an anthropomorphic tree. I understand that making a movie out of a legion of people's favorite book means the opportunity for a director's interpretation is limited, but Jackson also needs to understand that for his trilogy to earn the title of epic it will require something more than simple length. RATING: ***1/2 |------------------------------| \ ***** Perfection \ \ **** Good, memorable film \ \ *** Average, hits and misses \ \ ** Sub-par on many levels \ \ * Unquestionably awful \ |------------------------------| MPAA Rating: PG-13 Director: Peter Jackson Producer: Peter Jackson, Barrie M. Osborne, Tim Sanders Writer: Frances Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Peter Jackson Starring: Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen, Viggo Mortensen, Sean Astin, Liv Tyler, Cate Blanchett, John Rhys-Davies, Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan, Orlando Bloom, Hugo Weaving, Sean Bean, Ian Holm http://www.lordoftherings.net/ --- http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect?tag=filmcriticcom&path=subst/video/sellers/amazon-top-100-dvd.html Movie Fiends: Check out Amazon.com's Top 100 Hot DVDs! Ask about our affordable e-mail advertising! Visit filmcritic.com on the Web at http://www.filmcritic.com ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30379 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 269818 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 178 X-RT-AuthorID: 1062 X-RT-RatingText: 3.5/5 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:34 2002 From: Steve Rhodes Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2001 03:28:41 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30403 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 270110 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 703 X-RT-AuthorID: 1271 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30403 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 74 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!erinews.ericsson.se!erix.ericsson.se!luth.se!cyclone2.usenetserver.com!usenetserver.com!lackawana.kippona.com!paradoxa.ogoense.net!sn-xit-04!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2364 rec.arts.sf.reviews:165 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 2001 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): *** 1/2 For those of you who, like me, were disappointed by HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE, as well as for those of you who can't get enough of magical tales, New Line Cinema has the perfect answer: THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING. Directed with dark intensity by Peter Jackson (HEAVENLY CREATURES), the film pushes the limits of its PG-13 rating. Decapitations in PG-13? Excuse me? "Are you frightened?" Aragorn a.k.a. Strider (Viggo Mortensen) in an early scene asks Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), the story's convincingly vulnerable hero. "Yes," Frodo replies with wide eyes. "Not near frightened enough," Strider corrects him. HARRY POTTER works best for the eight-to-twelve age group, but THE LORD OF THE RINGS is inappropriate for most kids under twelve. For those old enough to see it, THE LORD OF THE RINGS is definitely the more rewarding of the two. Sharing the majesty of opera composer Richard Wagner's own ring series, THE LORD OF THE RINGS has a bold, stirring score that's easily the best of the year. As the music moves your ears and heart, the sets will delight you eyes and mind. Filmed in the director's native New Zealand, the sets range from enchanted cottages to skyscraper-sized stone sculptures. The intricate story concerns an all-powerful ring. Like many people, I've never read any of J.R.R. Tolkien's books about the ring. Nor, for that matter, any of the Harry Potter books. Prior knowledge isn't necessary for THE LORD OF THE RINGS although I suspect the books' many fans will be able to appreciate numerous subtleties that I missed. If you don't know the story, be sure and see the movie from the very beginning as the opening explanation is quite helpful. The ring is an extremely challenging and dangerous possession as Frodo finds out when the ring passes from Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm) to him. Both of them are Hobbits, which is a race of half-height people with wide and very hairy feet. There are many different races in the story, as well as some quite scary characters. One race of bad guys appears rather like the Borg from Star Trek. The hardest monster to defeat looks like a mutant Shrek on major steroids. Between considerations of the mythology, there's a lot of fighting, some of which will remind you of similar scenes from STAR WARS. But, when the going gets tough, Gandalf (Ian McKellen), Frodo's tall mentor and protector, sometimes resorts to "Run!" My only complaint? Like HARRY POTTER, the film could stand some trimming. I would have liked it even more if it were a tad shorter. Having now seen the first one, I can't wait for the two sequels, which have already been filmed and are going to be released for the 2002 and 2003 Christmas seasons. THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING runs 3:00. It is rated PG-13 for "epic battle sequences and some scary images" and would be acceptable for kids around 12 and up. The MPAA should never have said "some scary images." There are many extremely scary images in the movie. The film opens nationwide in the United States on Wednesday, December 19, 2001. In the Silicon Valley, it will be showing at the AMC and the Century theaters. Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com Email: Steve.Rhodes@InternetReviews.com *********************************************************************** Want free reviews and weekly movie and video recommendations via Email? Just send me a letter with the word "subscribe" in the subject line. ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30403 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 270110 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 703 X-RT-AuthorID: 1271 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:34 2002 From: Laura Clifford Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:39:11 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30421 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 270574 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 386 X-RT-AuthorID: 1487 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30421 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 92 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!newsfeed.bahnhof.se!newsfeed1.bredband.com!bredband!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!hub1.nntpserver.com!sjcppf01!usenetserver.com!easynews!sn-xit-02!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2390 rec.arts.sf.reviews:171 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING -------------------------------------------------- When Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm, "The Sweet Hereafter") finds the One Ring he becomes oddly possessive of it, but when he leaves the Shire, his old friend Gandalf (Ian McKellen, "X-Men") persuades him to leave it for his beloved cousin Frodo (Elijah Wood, "The Ice Storm"). Once the wizard Gandalf discovers the ring's evil origins in the hell fires of Mordor, he insists that Frodo flee as Lord Sauron's nine wraiths will be hunting it down. Reunited in the Elvish Kingdom of Rivendell, where King Elrond (Hugo Weaving, "The Matrix") declares that the ring must be destroyed at Mordor, Frodo accepts the task under Gandalf's watchful eye. They, along with Frodo's three Hobbit friends Sam, (Sean Astin, "Rudy"), Pippin (Billy Boyd) and Merry (Dominic Monaghan), the dwarf Gimli, (John Rhys-Davies, "The Living Daylights"), elf Legolas, (Orlando Bloom, "Wilde") and humans Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen, "A Perfect Murder") and Boromir, (Sean Bean, "Don't Say a Word") form a fellowship in "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring." Cowriter (with Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens) director Peter Jackson ("Heavenly Creatures") brings the much anticipated first installment of his ambitious trilogy to the screen with the creativity and confidence of the young George Lucas. If the first is any indication, Jackson's films are sure to take the "Star Wars" mantle as beloved mythic epic for a new generation. The introduction of the Shire is the film's weakest point, recalling the childlike cuddliness of Ewoks, but quickly the legend of the One Ring is established (complete with jaw-dropping flashbacks of Sauron's Orc army in battle against Middle Earth) and Frodo's adventure begins. He leaves the Shire with ever loyal Samwise Gamgee silhouetted with horse and low wooden fence against a painted sky like Scarlett O'Hara departing Atlanta with her wooden horse-drawn cart. The two meet up with Pippin and Merry in time to flee from a hooded ringwraith and make their way to the Prancing Pony Pub where they're joined by Aragorn and Frodo makes his first eerie journey with the ring into invisibility. After the elf princess Arwen (Liv Tyler, "One Night at McCool's") rescues the injured Frodo from the ringwraiths in a rousing chase on horseback, the band arrives at Rivendell to find Gandalf, who has just escaped the clutches of his former colleague Saruman, (Christopher Lee, "Dracula") now a follower of Sauron. The fellowship will be severely tested during the journey towards Mount Doom, splitting apart as Frodo once again sets off with only Sam accompanying him. "The Fellowship of the Ring" is beautifully cast, with Ian Holms' Bilbo the only non-perfect fit. McKellen simply is Gandalf and his spirit pervades the film like Alec Guinness' Obi-Wan. The Academy should take note. Wood has the look and temperament of the guileless Frodo and Astin exemplifies the power of friendship. Viggo Mortensen is a good and noble Aragorn. Sean Bean deftly portrays the conflicted Boromir, the weak link of the fellowship who lusts for the ring's power yet courageously defends his allies. After McKellen, Bean's is the most complex and noteworthy performance. Rhys-Davies is endearing as the pugilistic dwarf. Cate Blanchett personifies the grace and wisdom of Galadriel. Liv Tyler proves the naysayers wrong appearing in the film's first truly exciting scene. Technically, the film excels in every department from the production design (Grant Majors, "Heavenly Creatures") and art direction (Dan Hennah, "The Frighteners") that imagine a whole new cinematic world to the special effects, costume design, hair and makeup used to create and complete the characters that populate it. This is spectacle, from the Elvish Rivendell which resembles an Alpine village adorned with Victorian gingerbread trim, to the towering stone sculptures that are the gates of Minas Tirith's Abu Simbel. The Cave Troll and Gollum seem as real as the actors. Director of Photography Andrew Lesnie is challenged to follow the flying spies of Saruman as they dart through tunnels and descend into Mordor as well as make the forced perspective that allows Gandalf to tower over hobbits look seamless. He's up to it. Peter Jackson's achievement in bringing all the pieces together is astounding. He's made the special effects film seem fresh again. "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" should meet the long pent expectations of Tolkien fans. I can't wait for the next installment. A- For more Reeling reviews visit www.reelingreviews.com laura@reelingreviews.com robin@reelingreviews.com ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30421 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 270574 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 386 X-RT-AuthorID: 1487 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:34 2002 From: Robin Clifford Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:56:31 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30433 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 270835 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 386 X-RT-AuthorID: 1488 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30433 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 124 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!news.net.uni-c.dk!howland.erols.net!netnews.com!nntp.abs.net!feeder.qis.net!sn-xit-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2386 rec.arts.sf.reviews:170 "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" "One ring to rule them all, One ring to find them. One ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them." So begins the epic adventure of J.R.R. Tolkien brought to the screen for the first time in live action by director Peter Jackson in part one, "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring." Tolkien's sword and sorcery trilogy has eluded filmmakers since its introduction in paperback to America in 1965. Animator Ralph Bakshi gave a valiant, but vain, attempt at recreating Middle-earth with his inventive rotoscope technique where live action is filmed, then animated. (See Richard Linklater's recent, experimental film, "Waking Life," for an interesting use of the anime method.) But, Bakshi ran out of steam and, especially, money, and only provided the first installment of the Tolkien epic, with the rest only a dream. Decades have passed since Bakshi's attempt and, now, fantasy master Peter Jackson ("Heavenly Creatures") has taken on the daunting task of breathing cinematic life into The Lord of the Rings classic. With budget figures estimated anywhere from $300 million to $500 million Jackson, his principle cast, a 2400-person production team and 26,000 extras have spent years on filming the entire adventure with plans to release the trilogy over the next two years. There has been a great deal of anticipation by the sizable number of fans of the books - especially for those of us whose interest was whetted by Bakshi unsuccessful attempt - and the first in the franchise will soon be here for the holidays. Jackson and his enormous crew have recreated Tolkien's world in a way that gives an accurate and wonderfully detailed imagining that is very close to my own mind's eye of the work. I read it a couple of times many years ago and the story has stayed with me ever since. When the camera first unfolds the laconic charms of Hobbiton and its cozy earthen homes where in habitants like a good meal and a warm seat in front of the fire I felt right at home and snuggled down myself as the author's words came to life on the screen. Those familiar with the story do not need a description of the Tolkien tale, but for the uninitiated (who, I hope, will become initiates of both the film and the books) this is the original S&S yarn (well, at least since King Arthur's mystical story) that spawned all the rest. The story really begins with Tolkien's 1935 fantasy story, The Hobbit, where meek little Hobbit Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm) is called upon to perform uncharacteristic heroic deeds and is given an important ring to protect with his life. But, the Ring has power beyond all imagination and the film begins many years after Bilbo first took possession. Kindly wizard Gandalf the Gray (Ian McKellen) drives his wagon into Hobbiton for the event of Bilbo's 111th birthday party and is joined by one of his favorites, Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), Bilbo's nephew. But, there is a hidden agenda around the visit and, following Bilbo's dramatic disappearance at his party, we soon learn that the Ring the elder Hobbit has possessed for so long has aroused the attention of an evil force that once was the dark lord Sauron (Sala Baker). Gandalf, knowing the Ring needs to be returned to the place of its making, Mount Doom, and cast into the fires that first formed it, enlists Frodo to the task of destroying the Ring of Power. (There is background information provided about the Ring and its scions done in narration at the beginning of the film, filling in the uniformed nicely.) As Frodo and his loyal friends Sam (Sean Astin), Pippin (Billy Lloyd) and Merry (Dominic Monaghan) set out on the long journey away from home Gandalf learns that the Ring is beckoning its creator, Sauron, to bring forth an evil army of the spawn of Hell, called Orcs, to destroy the peaceful coexistence of Hobbits, humans, dwarves and elves. After nearly being destroyed by head wizard Saruman (Christopher Lee), who has been turned by evil Sauron, Gandalf realizes the little Hobbits, brave as they may be, will need help navigating the dangerous terrain between Hobbiton and Mount Doom. Joining the little fellers is the human and son of a king, Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), human warrior Boromir (Sean Bean), elfin archer Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and a battling dwarf named Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) to become the Fellowship of the Ring. The little, determined band must face danger upon danger, do battle with the evil Orcs and seek the assistance of elf queen Galadriel (Cate Blanchett). This is the stuff that sword and sorcery fantasy is meant to be. The huge main cast is made up by a group of professionals who are able to give character to the roles they inhabit, despite the fact that the concentration of the film is in telling the story of the Ring and not on "character development." The actors bring Tolkien's myriad collection of creatures to life with Wood giving Frodo the wondering innocence and forthright resolve I remember from reading the stories. Ian McKellen is particularly notable in his wonderful and complex playing of Gandalf. Sean Astin is endearing as the not-too-bright but undyingly loyal aid to Frodo. Cate Blanchett is elegance and grace personified as the almost ethereal elf queen. There is an embarrassment of acting riches with the likes of Christopher Lee, Mortensen, Hugo Weaving and Ian Holm filling out their various characters nicely. Even Liv Tyler gives a pleasant perf as elf warrior Arwen. Technical efforts range from first class to brilliant, starting with Jackson as helmer and co scripter (with Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens). Cinematographer Andrew Lesnie will garner attention for his crisp, beautiful color palette with photography that ranges from dramatic close-up (especially with McKellen as the subject) to panoramic views of Hobbiton and the sinister fiery gloom of Sauron's lair, Mordor. Production design by Grant Major brings the world of Middle-earth to life from the homes of the Hobbits to the elfin lair and the dark lord's den of evil. Costumes by Ngila Dickson and Richard Taylor also help convey the fantasy world of Tolkien's imaginative mind. F/X, led by Jim Rygiel, are superb in capturing the creature proportions and mystical aspects of The Lord of the Rings and makeup and creature effects (including Sauron's Ring wraiths), by Richard Taylor, are top-notch. Score, by Howard Shore, is suitably majestic and stirring and sprinkle with a couple of songs composed and sung by Enya. "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" richly deserves the anticipation that has been building for so long with its fan base. My only complaint about installment number one of the trilogy is that I have to wait for so long for the rest. I give it an A. For more Reeling reviews visit www.reelingreviews.com robin@reelingreviews.com laura@reelingreviews.com ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30433 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 270835 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 386 X-RT-AuthorID: 1488 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:35 2002 From: Harvey S. Karten Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:39:55 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30435 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 272175 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 570 X-RT-AuthorID: 1123 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30435 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 145 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!10434!du.se!luth.se!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!feeder.qis.net!sn-xit-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2399 rec.arts.sf.reviews:172 LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING Reviewed by Harvey Karten New Line Cinema/ Wingnut Films Director: Peter Jackson Writer: Philippa Boyens, Fran Walsh, Peter Jackson Cast: Sean Astin, Sean Bean, Cate Blanchett, Orlando Bloom, Billy Boyd, Ian Holm, Christopher Lee, Ian McKellen, Dominic Monaghan, Viggo Mortensen, John Rhys-Davies, Andy Serkis, Liv Tyler, Hugo Weaving, Elijah Wood. If you're of a certain age you remember the song that goes: Three little words, Oh how I long for those three little words, I love those three little words...etc. Those are the three little words that every guy dreads hearing from his steady: "Where's my ring?" If you think that only modern women would kill for a ring, you haven't seen anything yet. In Peter Jackson's lavish, muy expensive adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien's blockbusting sci-fi trilogy, "Lord of the Rings," a diminutive fella is so reluctant to give up that little gold band with its really cool engraving that he fights terrible contenders for the prize: and none of them are even women (or at least he doesn't look closely enough to find out). With a faux-Shakespearean screenplay penned by the director together with Philippa Boyens and Fran Walsh and at least three pairs of wide, turquoise blue eyes which may have been courtesy of Bausch & Lomb, Jackson's epic tale filmed by Andrew Lesnie across the length and breadth of New Zealand is likely to hold only its key audience age for the entire three hours. The targeted audience, I'd wager, is not the same as the Harry Potter crowd. Raise the typical age from nine to, oh, about sixteen, and you'll find the key people to fill the seats of theaters across the U.S.--where the film opens at about the same time as it premieres to an eager band of Kiwis who spent parts of 274 days watching the entire trilogy take form. There's quite a market for a certain category of sci-fi tale, the sort that elevates stories into legends and legends into myths. If in pre-literate days (and I don't mean the current era) the bright, wide-eyed children would gather around their elders to hear tales of ghosts and goblins, elves and spirits, the current hi-tech, wired generation prefers the videogame to the verbalizer, the big screen to the story-teller. Though the story takes part in the so-called Middle Kingdom at a time that weapons varied from the large stones known to paleolithic humankind to the bows and arrows familiar to Robin Hood and his Merry Band, its New Zealand topography evokes current events, in its most horrifying scenes the efforts by the Northern Alliance and its compatriots in Afghanistan to smoke out the evil forces hidden in the innumerable caves of Tora Bora. During an over-narrated introduction that punctuates a landscape familiar to any who have traveled into rural areas, we are introduced to a band of leprechaun-type folks, Hobbits, who are each about four feet tall and whose elder statesman is the 111- year-old Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm)--who has custody of the title ring and who with the blessing of his wizard friend Gandalf (Ian McKellen) hands it for safekeeping to his adopted nephew Frodo (Elijah Wood). The presentation may not be a mistake when you look at civilization as a whole, but from the teenager's point of view the gift is a disaster. This is a ring capable of giving its possessor great power for evil, the sort of link that Osama bin Laden would love so much that he'd send scores of young men to kill themselves to get it. With it he could wreak havoc on the eighty percent of the world with infidel inclinations and about sixty percent of the people who are true believers as well. What's more the ring actually WANTS to be owned by the bad guys, so that everywhere Frodo goes he seems to be pulled in the direction of evil beings. The Tolkien trilogy, which was filmed at a cost (including marketing) of $400 million--is the epic story of Frodo's fights with fanatics, the latter led by turncoat Saruman (Christopher Lee) who rules over assorted birds, simian-like creatures, and tentacled terrors of the marshes like a lion tamer whose charisma requires no whip. Not even the wizard Gandalf, employing the language of Milton and Shakespeare, is a match for this albino- countenanced Satan who is determined to wrest the prize from the hands of its young protector using scores of persistent horsemen and sabre-rattling devotees. Opposing them are Frodo, whose team includes the noble warrior Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), bowman Legolas (Orlando Bloom), and a Dwarf, Gimil (John Rhys-Davies), whose Scottish accent could almost charm the horse from under its misguided Mephistophelean. Hiking across Hobbiton hills into forests and Alpine-like panoramas, they are helped at one point by Galadriel (Cate Blanchett), who is queen of the elves and that tribe's princess, Arwen (Liv Tyler). Fighting back and escaping, dodging and skirmishing, the good guys relentlessly clutch to their prize, their scariest battle taking place in the murky Moria mines where they come across cadavers, are attacked by Orcs and ogres, and resume their odyssey to Mordor. Only there can this ring destroyed and the world saved. With only a slim risk of being accused of spilling spoilers, I'd add that if you are reading this now, you can safely assume that Frodo and his fearless fellows did ultimately succeed to ravage the ring. When we troop to the theaters in December of 2002 and 2003, we go not to determine the final outcome but because we know that the journey is far more important than the destination. While this picture is anything but an indie, New Line Cinema must be congratulated for emulating art-house distributors--for taking a risk with a young New Zealand director whose claim to fame is the critically well-received but decidedly specialized "Heavenly Creatures," a dark story of New Zealand teens whose obsessive relationship drove them to murder. In that 1994 New Zealand-produced work, Jackson uncovers a bizarre, Freudian fantasy world created by the girls, Paulie Parker and Juliet Hulme, that must have caught the attention of the producers seeking the precise man to take the helm here. "Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" is not the sort of sci-fi I'm accustomed to or fancy. I prefer the more credible and realistic, the type that sends up our current civilization rather than aims at widening the pupils. "Stepford Wives" is my cup of cappuccino with its parody of men's fantasies while "Logan's Run" yields epiphanies of our youth-crazed culture. There's too much one- darn-thing-after-another in Tolkien's tale, and the filmmaker who wants to remain faithful to the text must of necessity pitch a plethora of battles. After a struggle with an octopus-like killer, yet another with equestrian beings out of Washington Irving, then some fisticuffs with an ayatollah-like madman with hair as white as an elf-queens' ghostly pallor, I cry "enough!" Is it possible that our young hero holding firm to his prize could be equally wide- eyed at every adventure? I'd guess he'd be more like the twelve- year-old boy grooving on his long-haired, silver-tongued geometry teacher on the first day of the new term only to have eyes wide shut by the sixteenth time that he is frustrated trying to prove that side-angle-side does not really equal side-angle-side. Rated PG-13. Running time: 178 minutes. (C) 2001 by Harvey Karten, film_critic@compuserve.com ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30435 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 272175 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 570 X-RT-AuthorID: 1123 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:35 2002 From: Susan Granger Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:30:37 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30453 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 272481 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 742 X-RT-AuthorID: 1274 X-RT-RatingText: 8/10 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30453 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 37 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!news.net.uni-c.dk!howland.erols.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2414 rec.arts.sf.reviews:173 Susan Granger: "The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Rings" (New Line Cinema) At last, the first installment of J.R.R. Tolkien's epic good-versus-evil adventure, "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring," is here! Meticulously directed by Peter Jackson, this begins a mythic trilogy - with all three films made simultaneously over a year and a half. For the uninitiated, the plot revolves around Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), a tiny hobbit, who is entrusted with a mysterious ring when his elderly uncle, Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm), leaves the bucolic Shire. Forged of evil, the history of this powerful gold band reaches back to a time when men, elves and dwarves shared power over Middle-earth. Accompanied by his loyal friend Sam (Sean Astin), the wise wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen), an elf (Orlando Bloom), a dwarf (John Rhys-Davies), and two warriors (Viggo Mortensen, Sean Bean), guileless Frodo begins a dangerous quest to return the ring to be destroyed in the fires of Mordor's Mountain of Doom. While Liv Tyler and Cate Blanchett lend elven support, there are many obstacles, particularly the dark powers which wicked Saruman (Christopher Lee) wields from Isengard, his Gothic fortress. There are terrifying, menacing creatures like Ringwraiths on horseback, Orc archers and - most impressively - a giant demon troll from the Mines of Moria. While avid fans debate the accuracy, I found it long and repetitive with garbled genealogies, confusing mythology and excessive violence for PG-13. But, visually, Grant Major's production design and the CGI effects are amazing: the Gollum, the alpine village of Rivendell, the Lothlorien forest, the crumbling bridge of Khazad-dum - all heralded by the Harold Shore's/Enya's sweeping music. On the Granger Movie Gauge of 1 to 10, "Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" is a scary, vivid, awesome 8, primarily for Tolkien devotees. ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30453 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 272481 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 742 X-RT-AuthorID: 1274 X-RT-RatingText: 8/10 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:35 2002 From: JoBlo Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 19:26:45 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30466 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 272859 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 573 X-RT-AuthorID: 1021 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30466 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 119 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!news.net.uni-c.dk!newsfeed1.uni2.dk!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2426 rec.arts.sf.reviews:174 THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING RATING: 7/10 For more reviews and movie wallpapers/screensavers, visit http://www.joblo.com/ PLOT: We're in Middle Earth and it's packed with hobbits, elves, dwarves, wizards and all other kinds of kooky characters. A ring has turned up that is extremely powerful and is said to lead anyone who holds it to evil. The Dark Lord Sauron wants that puppy back (the bastard wants to rule the world) but a fellowship of nine goodies from the area, including Frodo, the dude actually carrying the ring, set out to return and destroy the ring into the fires of Mount Doom, the place at which the band was forged in the first place and the only place where the ring can be obliterated. CRITIQUE: An amazing production filled with awesome special effects, terrifying beasts from another time, darkness all around, interesting characters and a pretty basic story to follow, but not one which engulfed me completely, most likely due to my personal disinterest in the genre and some smaller issues as well. But for what it is, this movie certainly delivers in spades with wizards, hobbits, elves, black-hooded riders (creepy as hell!), dwarves and everything else you'd ever want from an adult fantasy movie (not that kind of "adult" movie, ya perv!) and a little bit more. Have you read the books? Are you already a huge fan? Well, then my opinion will likely not resonate much with you. I haven't read the books, don't know much about the story or the people surrounding it and basically went in to this movie with low expectations, which were happily surpassed. Now there's been a lot of hype and early hyperbole on this film already ("One of the greatest movies of all-time?") but I suspect that everyone will come to their own appreciation of this film, in relation to their personal connection to the stories in the first place. For me, this was "just a movie" and as a film, it's a pretty solid fantasy/action/horror flick with some minor issues. The most obvious one for me was the film's length, which seemed a little elongated at three hours. The narrative followed a very basic action/slowdown & exposition/action/slowdown & exposition pattern, and some of its more gradual scenes weren't as interesting to me as they might be to others who actually understood everything that everyone on the screen might've been talking about. To me, there were just too many weird and indistinguishable names and places to separate from one another, and after a while, some of them just got confusing (and why on God's green Earth did Frodo's buddy keep calling him Mr. Frodo?!? What was that all about?!) Don't get me wrong, the story is actually a pretty simple one to follow (kid with ring being helped by others must get it to a mountain and destroy it there), but some of the smaller details, the conversations about so-and-so in such-and-such a place, went over my head, every now and then. The dialogue was also decent for the most part (no over-the-top crap here and generally quite comprehensible), but some of the more overly-poetic stuff just struck me as a little too goofy. But I'm sure that would also depend on whether or not you're "into" this genre, and like I said earlier, it's really not my cup 'o brew. Other than that, the CGI was pretty solid and complementary (although I noticed that the hobbits were a little smaller in wide shots then they were in close-ups with their immediate environments) and the creatures lurking all around, very authentic to the point of scaring the shit out of me, even though I was in the theatre (the Ringwraiths, Orcs and that nutty ol' Cave Troll being the most kickass). As for the plot details, well, I bought most of the stuff that they tossed my way but I still don't understand how these nine individuals looking after the ring, could sustain themselves so well against these crazy animal-beasts-from-hell, during one particular scene in the Mines of Moria. I mean...c'mon...four of them are even under four feet tall, for God's sakes! Aaaaaanyway... What was good about the movie? Well, after all this time in waiting, I have to give it up to director Peter Jackson for creating such an incredibly believable environment in which this otherworld takes place. Every detail of the film seemed real, from the dark, twisted battle sequence opening up the movie, down to the dirt in the little hobbit's fingernails. The sense of "evil" all about is particularly well established. Speaking of the opening, I also liked how they prologued the entire film with a little back-story for everyone to get the gist of the ring, its power and its history. Well done. The actual physical beauty of the picture was also quite astounding with amazing sets and real-life locations used to bring the movie to an astonishing life. And what would any film be without its actors and their credibility? Well, that was another plus on this film's side. The casting seemed perfect from top to bottom, with special kudos going out to Ian McKellen as Gandalf (the anchor of the movie, in my opinion), Elijah Wood as Frodo (despite/because of the overly bulgy eyes) and my main man Viggo Mortensen (still acting with his hair, but coming through gangbusters here). Christopher Lee is also to be noted. The pacing of the film was good enough, with action leading to exposition to more action, but there were at least a few scenes which seemed pretty extraneous to me (and not knowing the "full story", maybe I'm missing something...I don't know). The Cate Blanchett sequence in particular, struck me as somewhat unimportant to the grand picture of it all. To top it all off, the score also did a fine job of churning the film's butter, although it didn't necessarily overwhelm (whether that's good or not...you decide). Overall, the movie certainly does give you the real sense of dread, fear and pressure that l'il Frodo is under, and provides for enough very cool sequences to make up for its little faults. It will definitely not play for everyone (in fact, I'm curious to see how it does at the box-office, because it's certainly not geared towards kids!) and the ending might not be appreciated by some (it's open-ended, you see-I didn't mind at all), but the overall picture is extremely well-made, with authenticity flowing from its pores and plenty to take in. A solid start to the three-part adventure. Review Date: December 13, 2001 Director: Peter Jackson Writers: Peter Jackson, Frances Walsh, Philippa Boyens Producers: Peter Jackson, Barrie M. Osborne Actors: Elijah Wood as Frodo Ian McKellen as Gandalf Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn Genre: Fantasy Year of Release: 2001 ------------------------------------- JoBlo's Movie Emporium http://www.joblo.com/ ------------------------------------- (c) 2001 Berge Garabedian ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30466 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 272859 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 573 X-RT-AuthorID: 1021 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:35 2002 From: Bob Bloom Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 18:57:23 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30500 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 274003 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 872 X-RT-AuthorID: 1363 X-RT-RatingText: 3.5/4 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30500 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 100 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!erinews.ericsson.se!uab.ericsson.se!erix.ericsson.se!luth.se!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!sn-xit-01!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2454 rec.arts.sf.reviews:176 LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING (2001) 3 1/2 stars out of 4. Starring Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen, Sean Astin, Liv Tyler, Viggo Mortensen, Cate Blanchett, John Rhys-Davies, Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan, Orlando Bloom, Hugo Weaving, Sean Bean, Ian Holm and Christopher Lee. Music by Howard Shore. Screenplay by Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens and Peter Jackson. Directed by Peter Jackson. Approx. 3 hours. Rated PG-13. Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring presents an opulent, ambitious adaptation of the first book of J.R.R. Tolkien's masterpiece. Only the most ardent purists will object to any deletions and compressions wrought in the page-to-screen transfer. Most viewers and lovers of the novel will find this a most satisfying rendition. And if you've not read Lord of the Rings nor its prequel, The Hobbit, don't worry. Ring opens with a lengthy prologue giving a history of the One Ring, its importance and how it came into the possession of the hobbit Bilbo Baggins. Creating a realistic fantasy world may seem like a contradiction. But it is the linchpin of success for an undertaking such as Fellowship of the Ring. The technical sorcerers, led by Jim Rygiel, who worked with director Peter Jackson, have conjured a magnificent replica of Tolkien's Middle Earth. The Shire, the hobbits, dwarves, elves, wizards and orcs who inhabit this mythical land all look as if they stepped out of pages from the book. At three hours, the first of a trilogy (the next two movies will be released in December 2002 and December 2003, respectively) hardly lags. Out of necessity, much of Tolkien's explanations and expositions have been deleted or condensed. This fast-paced adventure epic moves on a grand stage. The film overflows with fierce battles, frightening characters and perilous situations. It almost plays like an old movie serial, as Frodo Baggins and his friends bound from one death-defying exploit to another. The film weaves a magical spell through its humor and heart, one as big and vast as the New Zealand landscape that serves as Middle Earth. Like most fantasy novels, the main plot of the Lord of the Rings trilogy is a quest. Frodo Baggins, the nephew of Bilbo, must return the powerful One Ring to Orodruin, the fire-mountain where it was forged, and cast it into the Cracks of Doom to destroy it. The evil wizard Sauron the Great, who forged the ring but then lost it, covets it because its power grants him dominion over the earth. The timid but determined Frodo and the eight other members in the Fellowship of the Ring have sworn to destroy the ring so Sauron cannot reclaim it. And while Ring's special effects dominate the film, the script by Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens and Jackson do not allow the characters to be gobbled up by movie magic. They bring Frodo and his friends to life, giving them distinct personalities. As portrayed by Elijah Wood, Frodo is a reluctant hero, assuming the responsibility for destroying the ring even though he does not want such a burden. The strong cast complements each other, especially Sean Astin as Sam, Frodo's close friend and protector. Others in this fine ensemble include Ian McKellen as the wizard Gandalf, whose magic aids Frodo and his friends; Liv Tyler as Arwin, an elf; Viggo Mortensen as Strider the Ranger; Cate Blanchett as Galadriel; John Rhys-Davies as Gimil the dwarf; Billy Boyd as Pippin and Dominic Monaghan as Merry, hobbit friends of Frodo's; Orlando Bloom as Legolas, an elf; Hugo Weaving (Agent Smith in The Matrix) as Elrond the elf king; Sean Bean as Boromir; Ian Holm as Bilbo; and the legendary Christopher Lee as Saruman the wizard. Even though a few of these actors have little more than cameo performances, I suspect they will have more screen time in the sequels. Lee's presence pleases me to no end. It has been several years since this towering actor had a meaty role, and the former Hammer Films icon does not disappoint. Howard Shore's score has a mythical lilt, a near Celtic flavor. Also worth mentioning is the extraordinary camera work of cinematographer Andrew Lesnie, especially in the forced perspective photography used to make Wood, Astin and the other hobbit actors appear smaller than their actual size. The Fellowship of the Ring soars and captivates. I highly recommend it, not only to fans of the books, but to all who enjoy traversing realms of fantasy. You will not be disappointed. Bob Bloom is the film critic at the Journal and Courier in Lafayette, IN. He can be reached by e-mail at bloomjc@yahoo.com or at bobbloom@iquest.net. Other reviews by Bloom can be found at www.jconline.com by clicking on golafayette. Bloom's reviews also can be found on the Web at the Internet Movie Database: http://www.imdb.com/M/reviews_by?Bob+Bloom ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30500 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 274003 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 872 X-RT-AuthorID: 1363 X-RT-RatingText: 3.5/4 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:35 2002 From: Jon Popick Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:07:43 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30502 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 273736 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 595 X-RT-AuthorID: 1146 X-RT-RatingText: 8/10 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30502 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 99 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!erinews.ericsson.se!erix.ericsson.se!luth.se!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!hub1.nntpserver.com!telocity-west!TELOCITY!sn-xit-03!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2458 rec.arts.sf.reviews:177 Planet Sick-Boy: http://www.sick-boy.com "We Put the SIN in Cinema" © Copyright 2001 Planet Sick-Boy. All Rights Reserved. Let me preface this review by saying I know very little about The Lord of the Rings trilogy. I did have the long-playing record of The Hobbit, a much-maligned animated version of the prequel to Rings made in the late '70s. But that doesn't mean I wasn't looking as forward to the first film, The Fellowship of the Ring, as the people who voted J.R.R. Tolkien's books as the best of the 20th century. Anyone who regularly sees movies should be equally as excited. Already the biggest episodic undertaking since Star Wars, the trilogy are the first films to be shot simultaneously (Parts 2 and 3 of both Back to the Future and the upcoming sequels to The Matrix are as close as anyone has come). It took over a year and, depending on who you believe, between $190 and $400 million to film the three Ring pictures, which are set to be released at the end of 2001 (Fellowship), 2002 (The Two Towers) and 2003 (The Return of the King). Fellowship is a perfect blend of action and fantasy, of special effects and thoughtful storytelling, and, in a time when the two seem anything but mutually exclusive, blockbuster juggernaut and arthouse darling. It's a shoo-in for multiple Academy Award nominations for its incredible technical package, which is probably the best and most detailed since Titanic. People may scoff at the notion of James Cameron carefully replicating the silverware aboard the doomed ship, or of Fellowship's Peter Jackson wasting time with the authenticity of the swords in his film, but, for some reason, it works incredibly well. Fellowship starts with a brief yet breakneck explanation of the origin of the ring that weaves its way through the three Tolkien novels. It seems that long ago (although not in a faraway galaxy) 19 powerful rings were created and distributed to the various peoples of a place called Middle Earth. But one additional ring - a master to the other 19 - was also secretly fashioned. Its possessor could control the other rings and, presumably, anything else he or she desired. The ring changed hands a couple of times, ultimately being discovered by Bilbo Baggins (the hero of my long-playing record), a hobbit who held on to it for 60 years without realizing what he had. On the evening of his 111th birthday, Bilbo (From Hell's Ian Holm), operating on the advice of wizard Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen, X-Men), passes the ring to cousin Frodo (Elijah Wood, Black and White). Gandalf, you see, knows the evil potential of the ring and, after doing some digging, discovers its long-dead former owner is regaining strength, though he can't yet take human form. Yeah, that bit sounds a lot like Voldemort from Harry Potter (as does the incident with the cave troll). And there isn't much difference between Fellowship and much of what happens in Star Wars, either. As shameful as it may seem, it's hard not to think about how derivative Fellowship's story is, even though Tolkien's book predates the birth of George Lucas and J.K. Rowling by decades. The rest of the film, which depicts Frodo and his titular fellowship of eight other various creatures (hobbit, human, elf, wizard and dwarf) embarking upon a journey to destroy the ring in the fire of the appropriately named Mount Doom, isn't anything but a road trip. A really bumpy, increasingly frightening road trip with bad guys scary enough to give adults nightmares for weeks. Jackson, who directs, produces, co-wrote the screenplay and I think appears as a drunk in Fellowship's bar scene, confirms the brilliance displayed in his Oscar-nominated Heavenly Creatures, and, if possible, a little bit more. The trilogy is a huge undertaking, but Jackson clearly is in full command of his craft. It was downright shocking to learn he used a crew comprised of mostly Australians and New Zealanders with no big feature-film experience. Even if you ignore the slick post-production special effects and the oft-copied story, you have to admire Jackson's incredible attention to detail, whether its keeping the size of the characters in perspective, or letting his main elf walk on top of hip-deep snow while the others are forced to trudge through it. Back in July, I got my mitts on a copy of the first episode of television's 24 and, after being dazzled by it (twice), began moaning and griping about having to wait several months to find out what happened. You'll get the same feeling from Fellowship, only you'll have to wait 12 months instead of a few. The film, like The Empire Strikes Back, ends with absolutely no resolution, simply because it can. It's simultaneously frustrating and cool. So let's sum it all up: Fellowship is wonderful, and though its story is something we've all seen before, it's one of the best films of the year. Will it please fans of the book? I think so. Will it make a ton of money? You bet. Will it factor into the Oscar race? Yes. Do you need to be familiar with the story to see the film? Absolutely not. Will it be bigger and better than Episode Two? It's too early to tell, but Fellowship doesn't have a Jar-Jar Binks, so it's got an early lead. 2:58 - PG-13 for epic battle sequences and some scary images ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30502 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 273736 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 595 X-RT-AuthorID: 1146 X-RT-RatingText: 8/10 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:35 2002 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.ida.liu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!newsfeeds.funet.fi!newsfeeds.funet.fi!newsfeed2.funet.fi!nntp.hut.fi!news.cs.hut.fi!newsfeed.song.fi!newsrouter.euroconnect.net!news1.ebone.net!news.ebone.net!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!128.230.129.106!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: Jonathan F. Richards Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 02:42:24 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30518 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 274246 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 896 X-RT-AuthorID: 2779 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30518 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 77 Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2478 rec.arts.sf.reviews:178 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING PG-13, 178 minutes Directed by Peter Jackson WHEN, WHERE Now playing at UA North, DeVargas For the first magical hour of “The Fellowship of the Ring”, you hope it will never end. By the time its third hack-and-chop hour winds down, you begin to think maybe it won’t. And in a sense, it doesn’t. This three-hour epic is only the first installment (all three already finished, to be released at the rate of one a year) of Peter Jackson’s adaptation of the classic fantasy novels by the late J.R.R. Tolkein. They tell the fabulous tale of the rings forged by the evil Lord Sauron and distributed among the leaders of the races of the world that he intends to dominate. Three rings went to Elves, seven to Dwarves, and nine to Men. And the One Ring to Rule Them All, Sauron kept – until it was hacked from him, finger and all, in a battle. All the rings bestow extraordinary power, and all carry the corrupting curse that power brings. And the One Ring, the one that concerns us in this story, has most improbably wound up in the possession of a certain hobbit, Bilbo Baggins by name, of the Shire, the place in Middle Earth where Hobbits dwell. How that came to pass is the subject of Tolkein’s The Hobbit, the book that preceded his Rings trilogy, and if you want to know more, you’ll have to read the book, which is by no means a painful chore. As the movie opens, Bilbo (Ian Holm) is celebrating his eleventy-first birthday, in the company of all the hobbits of the Shire, including his plucky nephew Frodo (Elijah Wood), and visiting wizard Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen). He disappears (literally) to write his memoirs, leaving the ring to Frodo. But Gandalf soon tells the younger hobbit what the ring is all about. Sauron has sent Dark Riders (the nine Men to whom the original rings went, powerful kings now reduced to agony-enslaved Ring Wraiths) to recover it so that he can rule the world. The ring must be destroyed, and it can only be destroyed in the fires in which it was forged, in the dark land of Mordor. The perilous adventure is joined, taking Frodo and his hobbit companions Sam (Sean Astin), Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd) well beyond the Shire to be joined eventually by the humans Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), and Boromir (Sean Bean), the elfin archer Legolas (Orlando Bloom), and the rough-hewn dwarf Gimli (John Rhys-Davies). Led by Gandalf, this fellowship strikes out for Mordor, pursued by the minions of Gandalf’s former mentor, good-wizard-gone-bad Saruman (Christopher Lee). . For a while the movie is awesome in every respect. Its storybook visuals are flawless, its characters are magnificently realized, and none better than the great McKellan as the white-bearded Gandalf in his peaked wizard’s cap and flowing robes. Jackson’s visual imagination seems limitless, and he has emploedy the services of original Tolkien illustrators Alan Lee and John Howe to create a look into which we slip without a moment’s hesitation or disbelief. But eventually the storytelling begins to flag, and it becomes one battle after another, with monsters that could have been borrowed from any of a dozen other computer-generated horror movies slathering and slicing, hacking and hewing, dismembering and skewering, and this is followed by several not-quite-heart-rending scenes of bonding. These failings are not enough to drag the whole thing down. Even when it loses its narrative power, the movie retains enough stunning visual imagination to keep it alive. “The Fellowship of the Ring” is a classic, with magic so dazzling it makes Harry Potter look like a kid’s birthday trickster. ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30518 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 274246 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 896 X-RT-AuthorID: 2779 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:35 2002 From: Ram Samudrala Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 20:16:56 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30535 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 274320 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 302 X-RT-AuthorID: 29 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30535 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 69 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!news.net.uni-c.dk!howland.erols.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2487 rec.arts.sf.reviews:181 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring http://www.ram.org/ramblings/movies/the_lord_of_the_rings.html Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. This is an old adage that has been the basis for many a story. It is the primary plot device behind John Tolkien's /The Lord of the Rings/ classic. Written in 1954-55, with origins dating back to 1937, the first of the three movie installments, which have already been filmed, tries to stay true to the mystical world present in the book. The resulting effort is a definite success. The star of the story, and the film, is not a person, but an object, a ring. The ring allows one to control a host of other rings handed down to the different peoples of Middle Earth: three rings belong to the immortal elves; seven to the dwarfs; and nine rings to mortal humans. The ring that rules all the others, forged using the fires of Mount Doom by the evil Wizard Sauron (Sala Baker), gives its holder so much power that it corrupts all those who seek to wear it, even the purest. Of course, there are some peoples that are more pure than others. Humans generally seem incapable of wearing it without being corrupted by its influence (no surprise there). But there exists a diminutive people, the Hobbits, who do seem at least capable of carrying it without being polluted too much. It falls upon one Hobbit, Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), to take the ring to Mt. Doom, which is the only place where it can be destroyed. Frodo is aided in his quest by the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen), the elf Legolas Greenleaf (Armando Bloom), the dwarf Gimli (John Rhys-Davies), two humans Striker aka Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) and Boromir (Sean Bean), and three other Hobbits including Frodo's friend Samwise Gamgee (Sean Astin). The story chronicles how Frodo, being a reluctant hero, travels through mysterious and dangerous lands of breathtaking beauty, and fights terrific monsters in the context of awesome towers and citadels, to achieve his goal. Perhaps one of the most visionary aspects about Tolkien's work is how he set the stage for a Dungeons and Dragons style video-game. Director Peter Jackson imbibes to the film the same feel present the book, in terms of traversing a diverse variety of landscapes, while encountering a diverse variety of creatures, friend and foe alike. Watching the film, it's easy to become mesmerised by the fantasy that is unfolding purely based on the cinematography. Like with Joanne Rowling's /Harry Potter/ (or for that matter, Stephen King's /It/), this film does not live up what I imagined, but it does a great job of presenting what Jackson and his co-workers imagined. The special effects are spectacular and meticulously done, perhaps even better than those observed in /Harry Potter/. There are no cop-outs here and every place that it matters, the effort and the expense have been evidently put in. The soundtrack sometimes overwhelms the dialogue, of which there is a lot, interspersed between the action sequences. Do not miss seeing this on the big screen. This is how movies should be made. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- email@urls || http://www.ram.org || http://www.twisted-helices.com/th Movie ram-blings: http://www.ram.org/ramblings/movies.html ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30535 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 274320 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 302 X-RT-AuthorID: 29 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:35 2002 From: Mark R. Leeper Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 03:22:03 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30544 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 274430 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-AuthorID: 1309 X-RT-RatingText: 10/10 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30544 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 123 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!news.kth.se!uio.no!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feeder.qis.net!sn-xit-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2499 rec.arts.sf.reviews:182 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING (a film review by Mark R. Leeper) CAPSULE: Three hours of what may be just about the best fantasy film ever made tells the story of J. R. R. Tolkien's THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING. Intelligent and visually beautiful, Peter Jackson's first film of the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy is an instant classic and quite possibly this generation's GONE WITH THE WIND. Rating: 10 (0 to 10), +4 (-4 to +4) Years ago, there were animated versions of parts of J. R. R. Tolkein's THE LORD OF THE RINGS made for television, and Ralph Bakshi made one for theatrical release. None was very satisfying. But the technology of creating images on the screen has advanced a very great deal since that time. Today, if you can visualize it, it probably can be put on a screen. How difficult a task is it to make a definitive version of Tolkien's THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING? Two tasks are necessary. The novel is already intelligent. What is needed is a way to abridge the very long story down to a screenplay without sacrificing the spirit or the intelligence. Also, for years Middle Earth has been beautifully visualized in the paintings of the Brothers Hildebrandt. Theirs have become as much the classic images of Middle Earth as the John Tenniel's illustrations have become the classic images of Lewis Carroll's fantasy world. What is required in making a film version is to have every frame of the film look like a Hildebrandt illustration. Both are impressive tasks that require a lot of hard work, but neither is insuperably difficult. Peter Jackson saw that both tasks could be done and the result would be one terrific film. We have that film now, and it delivers a heavy load of adventure, spectacle, and beauty, three hours with too many delights to list, all for the price of a standard film ticket. Ironically, the filmmakers have to contend with how well-known and respected the original story is. Indeed, my wife can list a multitude of small variations from the book. They are of the sort "When Frodo escaped by boat he was invisible and Sam saw only what looked like an empty boat. The film has him visible." And people who love the story do pick up on changes to the story like that. But nobody criticizes THE GUNS OF NAVARONE for what are far greater variations from its source novel. Indeed, few criticize even THE TEN COMMANDMENTS so much for liberties taken with its so- well-loved source material. Dramatically, the biggest problem of THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING is the classic one going back to the first publication of the story. THE LORD OF THE RINGS was one mammoth novel that the publisher arbitrarily decided had to be split into three pieces, published at six-month intervals. It is a story without an ending since Tolkien intended only a chapter break at that point. The film has the same mid-stride ending. Peter Jackson has promised his films will be released at twelve-month intervals to catch three Christmases. The anticipation for that second part is already building. The public's keenness of the first film, based on rumors and the trailer, has been very great. Now that the public has seen a much bigger sample of what Jackson can do with the story, the expectancy for the second film will probably be much greater. By the time the third film is ready to be released the phenomenon will probably be stronger than the STAR WARS phenomenon. George Lucas pointed the way to what computer effects could do for the fantasy film with his STAR WARS films. But he has had to write his own material and he is no Tolkien, so none of his films have been as well-realized as THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING. As few viewers will need to be told, the story is of a ring that holds absolute power. But the power it represents seduces and corrupts absolutely the person who wears the ring. A great and wise wizard, Gandalf the Grey (played by Ian McKellen), knows the power and the seduction of the ring. So he does not want to possess the ring himself but asks an innocent, Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), to take the ring and carry it where it can be safely destroyed. Thus Frodo begins a dangerous trek through Middle Earth, a magical world created by Tolkien with accents of British and Germanic folklore. Jackson moves the story right along as there is much territory to be covered, literally and figuratively, in a story that is rushed to be told in a three-hour film. Along the way the filmmaker gives us one beautiful scene after another. He needed a wide variety of shooting locations, but with a little help from computer enhancement, he managed to create the settings he needed all in his visually diverse homeland of New Zealand. But the plot is still complex. Those unfamiliar with the story of THE LORD OF THE RINGS can expect to be lost by the background and history sequences which move fast and violently in the first part of the film. But the viewer is not lost for long. The world soon simplifies to the travelers, their allies, and their enemies. Throughout the film familiar faces appear. Christopher Lee shows up here, Cate Blanchett there, but no single actor dominates the film. Not even Elijah Wood, who plays the main character, dominates. Actors seem to have been chosen because they were right in the part, not because their names would sell tickets. Nobody will think of this as a Liv Tyler film or a Sean Bean film. If it is anybody's film, it is that of forty-year-old Peter Jackson. Jackson has shown continuous improvement since his 1987 feature film debut with the aptly named BAD TASTE. My advice to him would be not to try to improve at this point. If he makes three LORD OF THE RINGS films of consistent quality that play like a single film, he will have a great artistic and financial success. His series will be the standard and the benchmark of fantasy on film. If, like George Lucas did, he falls into the trap of trying to outdo himself each outing he will end up with mismatched and less satisfying pieces. He has an excellent start. I admit that I am partial to the fantastic on film, but I rate THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING a rare full score of 10 on the 0 to 10 scale and a +4 on the -4 to +4 scale. Mark R. Leeper mleeper@optonline.net Copyright 2001 Mark R. Leeper ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30544 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 274430 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-AuthorID: 1309 X-RT-RatingText: 10/10 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:35 2002 From: Shannon Patrick Sullivan Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:27:27 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30550 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 274589 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 886 X-RT-AuthorID: 1699 X-RT-RatingText: 4/4 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30550 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 125 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!news.net.uni-c.dk!howland.erols.net!nntp.abs.net!feeder.qis.net!sn-xit-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2504 rec.arts.sf.reviews:183 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING (2001) / **** Directed by Peter Jackson. Screenplay by Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens and Jackson, based on the novel by JRR Tolkien. Starring Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen, Viggo Mortensen. Running time: 177 minutes. Rated PG for frightening scenes by the MFCB. Reviewed on December 21st, 2001. By SHANNON PATRICK SULLIVAN Synopsis: In the realm of Middle-Earth live the diminutive Hobbits. Sixty years ago, one unusually adventurous Hobbit, Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm) discovered a magical ring which he bequeathes to his nephew Frodo (Wood). But the wizard Gandalf the Grey (McKellen) discovers that Frodo's ring is actually the legendary One Ring, crafted by the Dark Lord Sauron millennia ago to dominate the world. Frodo must bring the Ring to the wasteland of Mordor to destroy it in the fires of the volcano where it was forged. To aid him in his quest, a reluctant Fellowship is formed: Gandalf, Frodo's faithful gardener Sam (Sean Astin), mischievous Hobbits Pippin (Billy Boyd) and Merry (Dominic Monaghan), the ranger Strider (Mortensen), human lord Boromir (Sean Bean), the Dwarf Gimli (John Rhys-Davies), and the Elf Legolas (Orlando Bloom). But as they cross the lands of Middle-Earth, the Fellowship is assailed on all sides by the forces of Sauron, including the spectral Ringwraiths, the monstrous Orks, and even Gandalf's mentor, the sorcerer Saruman (Christopher Lee). Review: In a sense, I'm lucky when it comes to watching "The Fellowship Of The Ring", the first of a trio of films enacting JRR Tolkien's immortal "The Lord Of The Rings". I first read the book when I was eleven years old -- a decade and a half ago -- so although I'm familiar with the source material, the details are sketchy enough that watching it unfold onscreen still bore suspense for me. I'm sure I would have been entranced with "Fellowship" even had I read the text yesterday; this way, I truly became absorbed into one of the most breathtaking cinematic experiences ever. Jackson faced many difficulties in translating the book to film. Most notably, Tolkien's novel is largely grounded in his development of the history and culture of Middle-Earth, impossible to directly portray in a movie. Add to this the sheer number of characters and plot points, and "Fellowship" could easily have become a horrendous mess, even with a three-hour running time. But Jackson has found the perfect middle ground: the changes he has made are reasonable and inoffensive, and enough of the spirit of Tolkien's work is preserved while nonetheless crafting something very much suited to the medium of film. Even if this movie version barely scratches the surface of Tolkien's detailed world, it is still apparent in the details. And not just the stirring set pieces, such as the glimpse back in time to when the Ring was first lost, or the sequence where the Fellowship passes two mammoth statues of ancient kings standing on the banks of a river. Rather, the history of Middle-Earth is deliciously hinted at in Grant Major's stunning sets and Ngila Dickson and Richard Taylor's glorious costume design. Consider, for example, a scene late in the film when the Fellowship has camped in a woods; all around them are fallen statues, centuries old, silent testament to the existence of Middle-Earth long before the opening credits rolled. Unlike the novel, it is the visuals which are the movie version's chief attraction. Jackson and cinematographer Andrew Lesnie have done a phenomenal job of transforming New Zealand into something fantastical and yet very real. More so than the two subsequent installments, "Fellowship" is very much a travelogue across the vastness of Middle-Earth, and the film reflects this. We experience the pastoral serenity of the Hobbits' Shire, the stark wintry majesty of the Misty Mountains, the dark and oppressive stillness of the Mines of Moria, each sight more riveting than the last. Jackson succeeds in demonstrating why "The Lord Of The Rings" is the quest to end all quests, why this novel was the progenitor not just of many imitators, but essentially of an entire genre. Some Tolkien purists may be upset by some of the changes between book and movie; I am not amongst them. Most simply shape the story into something more suitable for a film: whereas the book takes place over months and unfurls at an almost leisurely pace, there is a real sense of urgency in the movie version, which seems to occupy a much smaller timeframe. Other changes are more debatable, but are justifiable. One criticism often levied at the novel, for instance, is its paucity of prominent females; Jackson redresses the balance somewhat by expanding the role of the Elf Arwen (Liv Tyler) -- significant only in a small portion of the third book -- using her in place of another minor character and thereby involving her in more of the action. Some of Jackson's interpretations do not seem quite right to me: the Elven land of Lothlorien and its queen, Galadriel (Cate Blanchett), appeared far more alien and remote than I expected. But he also makes the threat of the Ring much more apparent by introducing a physical manifestation in Bilbo which is truly frightening. And Jackson makes far more use of (very appropriate) humour than did Tolkien. In a movie so lengthy, this is most welcome to provide some diversity. Other Jackson triumphs include the terrifying manifestation of the Ringwraiths (who long haunted my nightmares when I first read the book) and the eerie portrayal of the Ring's magic. Wisely, Jackson does not overplay the special effects except when it is absolutely necessary; dizzying shots of huge armies of Men and Orks, for example, feel completely genuine. The acting is fine across the board. Wood is excellent as the brave, timid, isolated Frodo. McKellen is superb as a man who is at once a genial old trickster and a frightening being of enormous power. Also noteworthy is Holm, who portrays Bilbo with just the right amount of eagerness, weariness and uncertainty. "The Lord Of The Rings" is one of the greatest, most imaginative novels ever written. With its enormous scope and unparalleled attention to detail, few thought it could ever be successfully translated into film. Peter Jackson is one-third of the way to proving those critics wrong: one of history's best novels is now one of its best movies. Copyright © 2001 Shannon Patrick Sullivan. Archived at The Popcorn Gallery, http://www.physics.mun.ca/~sps/movies.html | Shannon Patrick Sullivan | shannon@mun.ca | +---------------------------------+---------------------------------+ / Doctor Who: A Brief History of Time (Travel) go.to/drwho-history \ \__ We are all in the gutter but some of us are looking at the stars __/ ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30550 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 274589 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 886 X-RT-AuthorID: 1699 X-RT-RatingText: 4/4 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:35 2002 From: Homer Yen Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:30:08 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30552 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 274592 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-AuthorID: 1370 X-RT-RatingText: A- Summary: r.a.m.r. #30552 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 98 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!erinews.ericsson.se!erix.ericsson.se!luth.se!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!newsfeed4.cidera.com!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-01!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2505 rec.arts.sf.reviews:184 Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring – A Terrific Start of a Long Journey by Homer Yen (c) 2001 No one can envy Frodo's (Elijah Wood) insuperable task. An evil ring has come into his possession. But it is no ordinary ring, for it was forged from the blood of the sinister Dark Lord many epochs ago. While the Dark Lord was vanquished in a mythical battle, its spirit has remained alive and has searched the world over and through the ages to regain the ring. And if it were to find its way back to its master, darkness would cover all the lands, and all of the kingdoms of Middle Earth would fall. The ring must be destroyed by casting it back into the fiery chasm from which it was forged, in the heart of a volcano named Mount Doom. Frodo, a member of the Hobbit race who are more renown for reticence rather than adventure, understands what must be done. However, the spirit of the Dark Lord sees much. Warns a fanatic, "his gaze pierces cloud, shadow, Earth and flesh." There are few allies to be found and fewer safe passages. And so in this first installment of LOTR, the difficult journey begins. No, you won't envy his task, but you will be transfixed by this epic quest, which is a vibrant adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings." The film strikes an incredible balance between ambition and gratification. The effort is clearly a labor of love for Director Peter Jackson who ably transports us into a wondrous world filled with creatures that are foul and fey, magical and mystical. The story is replete with visits to fantastical cities, fraught with portents, and populated by colorful characters. The script crisply introduces the group (the fellowship of the title) of companions that accompany our brave Hobbit on this quest. Of most help is Gandalf the Grey (regal Ian McKellen), an aging but still-powerful wizard with a voice that oozes wisdom, eyes that peer into your soul, and a wrinkled face that tells a thousand tales of adventure. Also on the journey are skilled warriors from the human, dwarf and elf races as well as friends from his Hobbit home who, unfortunately, put their bellies in front of their brains. Other elements of the film are remarkable. The acting is energetic as if passion could aid their cause. The musical score adds a dimension of beauty reminiscent of angels weeping. Meanwhile, the set design and visuals are downright stunning. There is great attention in the details from the hairy feet of the Hobbits to the ethereal presence of the Elf Queen to the tempest-like atmosphere when Frodo turns invisible. Alas, it's pace and arc cannot be sustained. It's especially noticeable in the second hour where most moviegoers are accustomed to a two-hour feature length movie (this film spans three hours). With each new location visited, their mettle is tested either by opposing forces or their self-serving desire for power. At some point, despite the changing locales, it seems like a case of déjà vu. Meanwhile, special effects begin to take over, such as where the party encounters thousands of goblins and even a Demon. It reminded me of scenes from "The Mummy Returns" although the confrontations here are more stirring. But we can forgive the minor setback because of the momentum and the heart that has been developed. Nonetheless, for those who have long-awaited the release of this film, it's like a dream come true. One can only hope that the next installment will be equally fulfilling. I can't wait to find out. Grade: A- S: 1 out of 3 L: 0 out of 3 V: 2 out of 3 ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30552 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 274592 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-AuthorID: 1370 X-RT-RatingText: A- From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:36 2002 From: Shane Burridge Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 19:44:40 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30589 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 275580 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-AuthorID: 1305 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30589 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 176 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!erinews.ericsson.se!erix.ericsson.se!luth.se!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!209.249.90.70!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2542 rec.arts.sf.reviews:186 The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) 178m Like many other kids in high school, I became absorbed in Tolkien's 'Lord of the Rings' trilogy. In fact I was so taken by it that I adapted my own 320-page homage in comic strip. I can't really explain the trilogy's phenomenal popularity, but I do know that the thing that hooked me at 15 years old was the pedigree of the product. Here was one of the few books you could read as a teen which included such fare as dwarves, magical rings, and monsters - a sophisticated literary package born from a supposedly childish genre. It was grand, epic stuff that appealed to the kid inside all of us, and now Tolkien's fantasy cycle can be read as a blueprint for countless imitations - the naïve hero/magical token/quest/confrontation-with-darkness plotline is rarely strayed from in the fantasy fiction that has since followed. Then, too, there was BAD TASTE, the Peter Jackson film I saw some years after reading LOTR. Prior to the film's opening at the Auckland Film Festival, a scruffily-dressed Jackson shuffled on stage after being introduced by the Festival co-ordinator. This wasn't terribly surprising - New Zealanders don't subscribe to a notion of 'celebrities' being any different to most other folk. As if to confirm this stereotype, Jackson leaned into the microphone, said "Uh, yeah, if you're gunna throw up try not to hit the guy in front of you" and then shuffled offstage again to the sound of laughter and some applause. He was only half joking. Audience members *had* been vomiting at the premiere - a reputation of the film perpetuated by one friend of mine who gave away barf bags at his theater's ticket counter. Jackson disappeared from the auditorium leaving me to think "Who *is* this guy?". I had already known that BAD TASTE had been a labor of love patched together by Jackson and friends on a minimal budget over a few years' worth of weekends, and I enjoyed the film on that basis alone - it was an 8mm home-movie buff's dream project finally realized. I assumed that it would be Jackson's sole project, but of course the rest is history. Who would have thought that the laconic Wellingtonian on stage that night would have gone on to be nominated for an Oscar and then pulled off one of the biggest coups in filmdom - directing the long-anticipated screen version of LORD OF THE RINGS. There were no shortage of LOTR fans in the film industry who wanted to see the book on the big screen since its first publication. Among those associated with the project at one time or another were talents as diverse as Stanley Kubrick, John Boorman (he made EXCALIBUR instead), and even The Beatles (an intriguing idea which would have been fun even if the result couldn't have possibly been any good: Paul and Ringo were to play Frodo and Sam, George was to be Gandalf, and John wanted to play Gollum!) The most logical way to approach the task of adaptation was to film each volume of the trilogy as a separate work, but this was easier said than done - the only other film-maker to produce a version of LOTR was animator Ralph Bakshi, who in 1978 had gotten as far as squeezing the first half of the story together into one movie, a decision that infuriated audience members who were expecting the entire book (in one New York screening seats were torn up!). When Jackson got down to finally putting the trilogy onto celluloid he opted to shoot the three films back-to-back and stagger the release dates, saving both time and money. Filming on location with a New Zealand crew and post-production studio wasn't just cost-effective: it was literally the only way the film could have been made. It wasn't only the scale and length of the story that had deterred film-makers previously, but also the logistics and expense of creating the variety of landscapes and lifeforms of Tolkien's fantasy milieu. These may have seemed fittingly 'epic' obstacles, but it was the more basic problem of constantly integrating hobbits with men that proved one of the major stumbling blocks in past attempts at film production. As 'halflings' are basically half-sized men, distinct from the dwarves they sometimes keep company with, it would have been inappropriate to cast real life 'little people' (to keep it politically correct) in their roles. However, with 21st-century advances in CGI, Jackson was not only able to recreate convincing monsters and fantasy landscapes, but was also given the means to place 'half-sized' men alongside full-sized adults within the same frame. And finally, there is the question of interpretation. This may seem less daunting for the producers than it is for audiences; for are there any among us who have not seen a filmed adaptation of a book and felt disappointed that it didn't look the way it had first been imagined? And in the Ring Trilogy, there is a lot to imagine. In some cases it may be safe to go for a generic image (The Black Riders appearing as black silhouettes, for example) while in others it might be worth taking a conceptual risk. Just going by the book leaves some room for embroidery, and Tolkien's descriptions often promote different images in the minds of different readers. The Balrog, a monster that makes a brief but memorable appearance in 'The Fellowship of the Ring', is described as a sort of shadow with wings (I'd always pictured it looking like the mountain demon in FANTASIA), but appears as a more three-dimensional manifestation in Jackson's version. Remarkably, and perhaps because of a fusion of images that are generic, imaginative, and by-the-book, THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING really does look how the book "should", and I would think few Tolkien fans would be displeased with it (after laboring for a year on my comic I knew how difficult these issues of interpretation could be - Jackson has a photocopy of it somewhere - and found it easier to assume that the way I imagined everything was going to be the same way everybody else did). While we have only FELLOWSHIP to view at present it is a certain indicator of the films to follow. The most consistently exciting of the three volumes, 'Fellowship' begins several decades after Tolkien's earlier book 'The Hobbit' left off (we would hope that anyone planning a film version of this prequel would get Ian McKellan and Ian Holm to reprise their character roles of Gandalf and Bilbo for the sake of completeness). The power of the Dark Lord Sauron has been reawakened after an era of peace and a representative group of the free races of Middle-Earth (dwarves, men, elves, halflings) are dispatched to take the key to his power - a magical ring - to the heart of his domain in order to destroy it. Jackson's film sees the book brought to vivid life, and makes the old and archetypal seem revelatory and new. Some story material has been pruned to accommodate the cinema translation, but writing novels and writing screenplays are two different arts, and the editing works in favor of the film experience (I always thought the chapter with Tom Bombadil was a hiccup in the first book anyhow). While some characters are excised or reduced in the film, the roles of Arwen and Saruman get beefed up. You can already sense the strategy of the screenplay molding the arc of the book to audience expectations: the romance of Aragorn and Arwen is highlighted so that their wedding at the trilogy's conclusion will seem more of an ante-bellum reunion and less of an arbitrary decision; meanwhile Saruman is being groomed to represent the Dark Lord by proxy, and is established as the most visible enemy of the Fellowship (in the trilogy there is no final confrontation with Sauron, and we know how audiences love to see the villain get his comeuppance in the final reel). These roles are ably played (by Liv Tyler and Christopher Lee, respectively) and add to the varied cast that brings FELLOWSHIP to life. The performances cannot escape mention: Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, Orlando Bloom, McKellan and Holm inhabit their characters utterly, creating a depth of 'humanity' that prevents the film from becoming nothing more than a smorgasbord of effects technology. The one-on-one moments between Bilbo and Frodo are just as involving as the film's many dramatic action scenes (the whole 'Moria' chapter is a show-stopper). The film is a fantasy; yet it is real, just as real as the geography of many of its epic landscapes. The menace of the dark forces is persuasive, and the One Ring impresses itself as wholly malevolent. When Boromir (Sean Bean) weeps for 'his people' at the end of the story we believe his conviction, just as we are ready to believe in the history of this entire world (this is revealed effectively throughout the narrative in stunning flashbacks, and it doesn't hurt that we get three hours of immersion into the story, either). We accept it because Jackson never tips us a wink and jolts us out of the story - he treats the tale as seriously as the characters within it. I imagine there will be two types of nitpicking performed upon this film. Firstly, there will be the Tolkien cultists who will complain that somewhere in the film they heard a character mispronounce an Elvish consonant - although they would do better to notice some of the subtle, unspoken detailing that demonstrates this film was made by those who care (Legolas can stand on snow; the Uruk-hai wear the White Hand as warpaint; the hobbits rest in the shadow of three petrified trolls) and remember that it is nigh impossible to adapt books for the screen in their entirety (I can think of only one offhand that succeeded, and that was James Dickey's slim novel 'Deliverance'). The other nitpickers will be film critics - God forbid one of them should be crossbred with a Tolkien fanatic - and in this area I'm sure there will be some grumbles about narrative or miscasting. My personal peeves are so minor I'm almost embarrassed to mention them - but I did find that bucolic pseudo-Celtic tootling on the soundtrack distracting (it got an Oscar for TITANIC, so why not?); the comic relief offered by Merry and Pippin falls flat, but is at least short-lived; and the Black Riders make squeeching noises that sound too much like the pterodactyls in old Hanna-Barbera cartoons. And if I had to pick a vote for miscasting, I'd go for Cate Blanchett, who appears hell-bent on making her Elvish queen Galadriel as mysterious and aloof as possible, short of waving her arms and making "wooo-ooo" noises. It's good that my only quibbles are paltry: it's a clear indicator of how satisfying the film really is. FELLOWSHIP is a faithful retelling of a modern classic; a fine work of cinema that whets our appetites for the next two films, in which we can look forward to seeing Gollum, Shelob, oliphaunts, ents, Helm's Deep, and Mordor. There will be the usual glut of trading cards, picture books and sneak previews for those who can't wait, and want to catch a look ahead of time. I want to see Parts 2 and 3 even more badly than that, which is why I'm content to stay ignorant until they reach the cinema in their own good time. sburridge@hotmail.com ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30589 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 275580 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-AuthorID: 1305 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:36 2002 From: Dennis Schwartz Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2001 21:07:38 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30608 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 275592 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 873 X-RT-AuthorID: 1315 X-RT-RatingText: B Summary: r.a.m.r. #30608 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 144 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!erinews.ericsson.se!erix.ericsson.se!luth.se!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2559 rec.arts.sf.reviews:187 LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING, THE (director/writer: Peter Jackson; screenwriters: based on the book by J. R. R. Tolkien /Fran Walsh/ Philippa Boyens; cinematographer: Andrew Lesnie; editor: John Gilbert; music: Howard Shore; cast: Elijah Wood (Frodo), Ian McKellen (Gandalf), Liv Tyler (Arwen), Viggo Mortensen (Strider/Aragorn), Sean Astin (Sam), Cate Blanchett (Galadriel), John Rhys-Davies (Gimli), Billy Boyd (Pippin), Dominic Monaghan (Merry), Orlando Bloom (Legolas), Christopher Lee (Saruman), Hugo Weaving (Elrond), Sean Bean (Boromir), Ian Holm (Bilbo), Andy Serkis (Gollum), Lawrence Makoare (Lurtz), Craig Parker (Haldir), Marton Csokas (Celeborn); Runtime: 180; New Line Cinema; 2001) Reviewed by Dennis Schwartz "Fellowship" feels like every other "good versus evil" big-budget epic of $90m plus that has ever been filmed, including "Star Wars." However, New Zealand director Peter Jackson (Heavenly Creatures) does a good job of adapting J. R. R. Tolkien's first part of his trilogy, the 1,000-page three volume set published between July 1954-October 1955, "The Lord Of The Rings," by clarifying the story (an invented myth about an heroic quest--the theme of doing good for the world, somewhat, borrowed from the Finnish epic Kaleva) as simply and as eloquently as he could and by the magnificent visual scope of the film and excellent use of computer graphics, and by offering a robust and faithful rendition which should gratify the devoted readers of the popular novel and at the same time offer an accessible presentation to those new to the book. Unfortunately, it is a three hour film that grows wearisome after a while, as too many plot points are repeatedly explained and one battle begins to look like another (with the Orcs, Ringwraiths, and Uruk-Hai) and after one cliffhanger scene after another it begins to take on the B-movie look of a serial adventure shown back in the days of double-features during Saturday matinees. Nevertheless, this version of Tolkien, co-scripted by Jackson and Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens, comes off as an elegant visual action venture and the filmmakers should be congratulated for the results because this is a difficult book to put on film. It was tried in a 1978 animation by Ralph Bakshi, and that venture did not fare well. Ian McKellen, gracefully plays the magical Gandalf, the lanky good wizard garbed with a tall pointed hat and a long grey beard and who is a towering friend to the Baggins family living in the Shire. Gandalf drops in to visit his diminuitive Hobbit writer friend Bilbo (Ian Holm-he's reduced to an imaginary Hobbit height of three feet, as are all the Hobbits) on his 111th birthday celebration, as Bilbo promises to turn over the most powerful magical ring in the Middle Earth for safekeeping to the innocent Hobbit who has now grown to be a trustworthy young man, his adopted nephew, Frodo (Elijah Wood), but there's needed some additional coaxing from Gandalf before Bilbo reluctantly yields the magical Ring and retires to an elvish hideaway. Frodo knows nothing about the One Ring and its evil powers over any other force in Middle Earth. It was forged by the malevolent Sauron on Mount Doom in Mordor as a source of dark power to control the world, but was lost in battle and disappeared for a few centuries until it's retrieved by the improbable, Bilbo Baggins. The plot revolves around the need for the potent evil Ring, which can only be destroyed in the place it was created, being brought back to that treacherous place by Frodo as the Ringbearer with the help of his loyal friend Sam (Sean Astin) and frolicsome buddies Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd). They leave their beloved Shire for the first time with only that important mission in mind; they get help along the way from the magic of Gandalf and from the "human'' warriors, the heroic swordsman Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) and the conflicted Boromir (Sean Bean), who wavers about destroying the Ring, and the Elf archer Legolas (Bloom) and the fiery Dwarf Gimli (John Rhys-Davies). The main obstacle along the way for Frodo the Ringbearer and his eight Fellowship guardians comes from a renegade wizard who has been overtaken by Sauron's evil, Saruman (Christopher Lee), the mentor of Gandalf, who gathers his fearsome fighting monsters into an army who go to battle in order to capture the Ring. There are constant dangers from the relentless Dark Riders, various types of evil swordsmen, and all the natural dangers encountered along the way. The earnest Ringbearer and his bold companions keep going on despite these dangers, realizing the evil that will befall civilization if the Ring gets back into the wrong hands. After battle an injured Frodo receives needed help from the magical Elf princess Arwen (Liv Tyler) and in the Elvish settlement of Rivendell the princess' astute father Elrond (Hugo Weaving) and the Elf Queen Galadriel (Cate Blanchett), will offer their wisdom and comfort for all of the Fellowship members. The Ring itself is a tremendous temptation even for those who are good but imagine what they can do with its powers, as some contemplate taking it for themselves. Before reaching Mordon, the Fellowship must cross the deadly Mines of Moria, which is a cavernous tomb strewn with corpses where they are forced to fight their way out of its dark recesses with the fierce subhuman Orcs and one vengeful giant Orc. The film ends in Mordon with a nonending, the way action serial chapters used to in order to get the viewer excited about the next chapter. Tolkien meant for his mythological writings, voraciously read by the true believers of the novel, to look at a world other than our own, a fictionalized world with a different language and mythology and lore (there were no hidden religious messages). Each battle was perceived as a step ahead in Frodo's evolutionary scale and a way to fulfill enlightenment without looking back to the safe place he ventured from. Tolkien was after something else in his writings than what faces America today in its fight against terrorism, though it is hard not to relate the film to these recent events. Tolkien was a scholar who was interested in ancient languages and was dismayed that the English people lost the oral stories of the fifth century Anglo-Saxons who conquered England and gave the country its traditions and language and identity. When he wrote the book in 1939, England was under attack by the evil forces of Nazism. For him it became a question of the small people (ordinary people) being asked to exhibit courage to stop the world evil. His myth was rooted in reality, as he asked if we could undo the evil with a quest just like his beloved and good-hearted Hobbits did. It was an enjoyable but exhaustive spectacle to take in, a chance for today's adults to look at what many teenagers and hippies were reading back in the counterculture days of the 1960s. This film had a rousing musical score by Howard Shore and was directed with a deft passion and an ear for comedy by Jackson, and it also benefited by having great actors like Ian McKellen and Ian Holm give the film some needed colorful characterizations between all the animated battles. Tolkien was not much for giving women much to do in his stories, as in this film the talented women actresses, Tylet and Blanchett, are wasted in small roles. This is a cult book from yesterday that makes a popular film for today, one worthy of an Oscar nomination as Best Film (this one is much more literate than Gladiator or Braveheart, recent award winners--not that I think this is really the best pic of the year but, at least, it is the kind of film Hollywood could be proud of). This is the first installment in this trilogy, as there will be "Lord of the Rings'' features released the next two Christmases, with all three films directed by Peter Jackson. REVIEWED ON 12/28/2001 GRADE: B Dennis Schwartz: "Ozus' World Movie Reviews" http://www.sover.net/~ozus ozus@sover.net © ALL RIGHTS RESERVED DENNIS SCHWARTZ ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30608 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 275592 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 873 X-RT-AuthorID: 1315 X-RT-RatingText: B From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:36 2002 From: Ronald O. Christian Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 20:22:37 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30627 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 275827 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-AuthorID: 2596 X-RT-RatingText: 9/10 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30627 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 214 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!surfnet.nl!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2578 rec.arts.sf.reviews:190 The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) Ian McKellen, Elijah Wood, Viggo Mortensen, Cate Blanchett Directed by Peter Jackson Screenplay by Frances Walsh from the novel by J. R. R. Tolkien Score: 9 stars of 10 One film to bring them all and in the darkness bind them. "No longer will readers of Tolkien's novels be free to create their own images of the characters and places of Middle Earth. The film stifles the imagination of the reader, replacing it with the vision of the film's director." Of all the laments from Tolkien print-fans (called elsewhere "Tolkienistas", a term I resist because it implies a higher degree of physical activity than I believe these fans are capable) the most curious is that no films should ever have been attempted of J. R. R. Tolkien's highly ambitious novel "The Lord of the Rings". The mere existence of the film detracts from the reader's experience, these print-fans lament. Others lament that the film will now replace the novel entire; that people will stop reading the book now that they can merely rent the films, just as with The Wizard of Oz (1939). This flies in the face of a couple of observations: That Tolkien's novels are, right now, flying off the shelf at a higher rate than any time in history, and that in the case of Oz, there exists perhaps three versions of the film currently available, and over 40 versions of the novel still in print, 100 years after it was first published. Published in the mid-fifties in three parts months apart, The Lord of the Rings is often, even by fans, considered a trilogy (or, more fanatically, THE trilogy) when it had always been intended by the author to be a single novel. Arbitrarily broken up at chapter breaks by the publisher, the first novel is too long and ends abruptly, the last novel is too short, with a significant amount of the story hidden in the Appendices, and the middle novel begins abruptly and ends on a cliffhanger. The story as a whole, I hasten to add, is cohesive and cunningly wrought, starting somewhat whimsically, gradually growing darker in tone, finally ending where it started, presenting the formally bucolic Shire in an entirely different light, through the eyes of characters who have grown a great deal in the meantime. However, that the mismatched volumes of The Lord of the Rings are so ingrained in the public as "a trilogy" makes any film adaptation problematic; the public expects a trilogy of films, and (as has already been demonstrated) the story does not fit well into this format. Director Peter Jackson and scriptwriter Frances Walsh (The Frighteners (1996), Heavenly Creatures (1994)), obligated to follow the three-part format imposed by a nameless publisher half a century ago, are faced with serious pacing problems right out of the chute. Clearly, there's too much story in the first book to adequately present in a single movie of reasonable length. To top it off, Jackson and Walsh were forced to go somewhat into The Two Towers to reach some kind of conclusion. This combination makes the film both long, dense and hurried, with a rather sloppy ending. But besides the pacing and ending problems we knew the film would have, how well does it hold up? Exceedingly well. With a few inexplicable exceptions, the film is remarkably true to the book. The effort to bring Lord of the Rings to the big screen may have begun badly (early script treatments contained bizarre and unacceptable changes) but a change of studio, the influence of Tolkien fans Ian McKellen (Gandalf), and Howard Shore (soundtrack composer) and many other factors have combined to create a film that accurately captures the spirit of Tolkien's stories and a remarkable number of details. Sometimes too many details. In a nod to Tolkien fans that I think was unappreciated, Jackson wedged several "clever" references to the book into the film, including the title and some of the chapter names. I don't remember a director choosing to film a book's table of contents since The Fortune Cookie (1966) and I don't think it works here. Another part that doesn't work is the sorcerous dual between Gandalf and Saruman. Glossed over in the book, it makes sense that there would be more to the confrontation in a visual medium, but what could have been grim and frightening instead comes off as a rather silly exposition of waving staves and flying bodies. The scene of Galadriel's Mirror doesn't quite work either. Yes, her lines are right out of the book, and she grows taller and more fell just as the book describes, but instead of "terrible and worshipful" it comes off noisy and unattractive. Of details missing, the most notable was the reforging of Narsil, the broken sword that defeated Sauron in the prolog. In the text this event happens offstage, almost as an afterthought, yet becomes a key element later in the story. The film skips the event entirely. I suspect that this plot element has been moved rather than dropped, and will be interested in seeing how they work it in. Other aspects of the film were remarkably well done. Casting was especially brilliant. Ian McKellen himself a huge Tolkien fan, was inspired and inspiring as Gandalf. Christopher Lee, with decades of experience playing mysterious bad guys, was the ideal choice for Saruman. Elijah Wood and Viggo Mortensen are perfect as Frodo and Aragorn. As there must with any translation of book to film, there are several changes to the story, many of which were improvements. Aragorn is more human in this version, retaining the strong character of the text while adding some very realistic self-doubt. Elrond expresses more vocally his anger and disappointment with Isildur, (and by extension, all men) when he blew his chance to rid the world of the Ring. The romance between Aragorn and Arwen has been moved from the Appendices to a more central part of the story, and it works extremely well. A truly remarkable aspect of the film was the music. Howard Shore has expertly handled a thorny problem: What do you do with all the songs and poems in the text? Do you stop the film dead while various characters burst out in song, or do you ignore Tolkien's verse entirely? Composer Howard Shore came up with a very effective third option: Incorporate Tolkien's songs and poems into the soundtrack. A boy's choir sings in Elvish during the trek from Rivendel. A Maori men's choir, chanting in Dwarvish, adds heightened tension in Moria. Putting Tolkien's verse in the soundtrack instead of the narrative enhances the feel of Middle Earth without getting in the way of the narrative. I suspect that if books had soundtracks, Tolkien himself would have made a similar choice. This is probably the most effective translation of text to film I've ever seen. The film is not without flaws. The cave troll sequence goes on for way too long, surprising in such a packed film. Others, like Frodo's vision in the mirror and the scene on Amon Hen, were cut to the point of incomprehensibility. (Perhaps to avoid a spoiler for the second film.) Jackson has somehow contrived, through makeup and tent-like robes, to make Cate Blanchett unattractive. We hardly see anything of Lorien, and key character growth for Gimli and Legolas has been dropped. But some sacrifices must be made in the interest of time and the translation from one medium to another, and as a whole, the film works very well. But you wouldn't know that to hear people complain about it. Despite raking in record numbers for the month of December, the film is not without it's vocal detractors. In other articles, I created four categories for Tolkien fans who hate the film, (1) those who feel a film shouldn't be made at all, (2) those who hate the film because it couldn't be an exact literal translation, (Someone seriously suggested a six movie series which had human actors and CGI elves.) (3) those who hate the film because of a particular detail, (Liv Tyler at the Ford, the absence of Bombadil, misspelled Dwarvish words on the walls of Moria) and (4) those who hate the film for reasons that are just wrong. ("Elijah Wood looks too young" although he is precisely the age that Frodo would have appeared, according to the text.) Subsequent experiences have caused me to add a fifth category, Tolkien "fans" who have *never read the books* but nevertheless think that the film got major details wrong. Examples include people who think the Ralph Bakshi treatment from 1978 is canonical, (placing Legolas at the ford instead of Glorfindil (text) or Arwen (latest film)) and fans of the various Lord of the Rings offshoots (Dungeons and Dragons, EverQuest, etc) who expected the film to better match their own vision of Middle Earth. Others felt, against all reason, that the film was too violent. (All those hacked off arms and heads in the story were just kidding, I guess.) To those who prefer a more fluffy, musical Lord of the Rings, I suggest: Rent the Ranken/Bass versions of The Hobbit and Return of the King. All in all, I don't think it's reasonable to expect Peter Jackson to guess what's in the minds of fans, or to divine what non-canonical factors are expected. A film has a much better chance of succeeding if it conforms to a single vision, flaws and all, rather than trying to be all things to all people, ending up being nothing to nobody. And this film succeeds on a major scale. The story is compelling, the action mostly interesting and believable, the characters (with the possible exception of Gimli, who's not given a lot to do) are interesting to watch. Most of the special effects come off extremely well, and the major set-piece, the confrontation with the Balrog, is absolutely amazing to watch. But more importantly, the film captures more of the spirit of Middle Earth than I had any right to expect, without being too overblown. With that in mind, I would like to echo other reviewers' sentiment that Jackson should resist the dark side to which Lucas succumbed; trying to outdo himself technically with each film, eventually turning out extremely busy but emotionally empty films. Jackson has managed to capture the grandeur of Middle Earth without losing the atmosphere of the books; the longing, the sense of loss. If he can merely keep this up for two more films, resisting the urge to go over the top, he would have done a great deed. I was going to give Fellowship of the Ring 8 of 10 stars, subtracting two stars for gratuitous references to the novel's table of contents, and for a few special effects that didn't work (most notably Galardiel's Mirror). I then added a star for providing the invaluable service of getting anal-retentive print-fans' panties in a knot. I am eagerly awaiting the next installment. Ron www.europa.com/~ronc "If UN peacekeeping had been involved during the US civil war, it'd still be going on today." ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30627 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 275827 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-AuthorID: 2596 X-RT-RatingText: 9/10 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:36 2002 From: Karina Montgomery Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2002 20:03:01 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30676 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 276278 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 755 X-RT-AuthorID: 3661 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30676 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 92 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!newsfeed1.uni2.dk!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2630 rec.arts.sf.reviews:193 Lord of The Rings: Fellowship of the Rings Full price feature This is a difficult review to write. It's no secret that everyone I know who has seen this movie has loved it with a fever beyond normalcy. It's well known too that J.R.R. Tolkein's Middle Earth books were the zygotes of fantasy literature as we know it. I have to tell you, Gentle Readers, that reading the Fellowship of the Ring was comparable to having your front teeth pulled (which I had done as a child - it's quicker). Before the firebombs get mailed to my house, let me finish: The film is much, much better than the book, and for that I must credit director Peter Jackson, not the revered Mr. Tolkein. I am one of the fortunate but relatively few who have known Peter Jackson's work for a while, back to Dead Alive and Meet The Feebles. Those are markedly different films from this movie, which owes more in filmmaking slickness to The Frighteners and Beautiful Creatures. In the OFCS awards, I nominated Jackson for Best Director, but not LOTR for Best Picture. LOTR is filled with what are now (but weren't in the 1950's) the ultimate in fantasy stereotypes - mystical talismans (rings, swords), halflings, elves, dwarves, orcs, every D&D staple from the beginning of it all. I was an enormous, addicted fantasy maven in my day, so those who do not know me please do not think that I roll my eyes at that stuff; but also keep in mind I have seen plenty of it. Like truly classic films (Casablanca, Gone With The Wind) the idea, the sense of such a world, had to start somewhere, and it started in these books. What I found frustrating about the book was all the extraneous mystical mumbo jumbo that was irrelevant to the plot; long elven songs about warriors and whatnot that are not germane to the story being told, and such. Like the "begat" section of the Bible. Jackson mercifully dispensed with that and gave us the actual story, with all the walking and meeting singing beer-dispensers deleted and all the actual drama and excitement left in. Great score, too. Do not see it in a non-THX theatre if you can help it - the sound is mixed badly for crappy theatres. Jackson also has the visual gift of (I presuppose) presenting on screen exactly what it was that he wants us to see - any film of LOTR has some huge shoes to fill. Die hard fans are having to wear double layers of diapers to survive their enthusiasm while watching this one. That speaks volumes about how he has touched the heartstring of the work. His gift of presentation can be as varied as hilarious undead, heroin-addicted puppets, or murderous virgins, and what you see you rarely forget. The visuals are largely computer and New Zealand nature- generated, and, like (I shudder to compare) Phantom Menace, fill the screen with beauty and minute detail. The difference between Lucas' drivel and this is of course better source material and a better sense of what works. I especially enjoyed how the human-sized actors were seamlessly resized to be onscreen togther (with faces, not always children from behind) in their correct species proportions. Small detail but huge impact. I also hope the New Zealand Ministry of Tourism is prepared for the onslaught of travelers hoping to glimpse that small but beautiful country. Only strong actors and a solid screen play could make Tolkein's weepy romantic mysticism mystical again like it was for us when we were children. This interpretation comes very post-Dragonslayer, when we were all throwing money at anyone in a leather doublet with a sword, but it brings back the simple pleasures of the conventions of dwarvish pride and human arrogance. I hazard to add that in this film, I actually understood better the power of the ring, watching how it affected Frodo's companions and of course "Ring-Wearer-Vision" where evil is white and good is black. The craft of the film is superior to the source material, in my opinion, and all of Jackson's movies are paragons of craft. He clearly takes very close care of what he does, and his attention to visual style and meaning serve him well in such a dense tale. I will admit that it was not my very favorite film of the year, for which I will surely be hung out to dry, but it is to be applauded, appreciated, and viewed again. I do not think anyone will be dissatisfied; I certainly was not. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ These reviews (c) 2001 Karina Montgomery. Please feel free to forward but just credit the reviewer in the text. Thanks. cinerina@flash.net Check out previous reviews at: http://www.cinerina.com http://ofcs.rottentomatoes.com - the Online Film Critics Society http://www.hsbr.net/reviews/karina/ - Hollywood Stock Exchange Brokerage Resource http://www.mediamotions.com http://www.capitol-city.com ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30676 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 276278 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 755 X-RT-AuthorID: 3661 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:36 2002 From: Jerry Saravia Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 20:17:50 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30693 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 276604 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 875 X-RT-AuthorID: 1314 X-RT-RatingText: 3/4 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30693 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 124 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!erinews.ericsson.se!erix.ericsson.se!luth.se!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2643 rec.arts.sf.reviews:194 THE LORD OF THE RINGS (2001) Reviewed by Jerry Saravia January 2nd, 2001 RATING: 3 stars I have not read the books of J.R.R. Tolkien's hugely popular epic fantasy though I have always meant to. This may be the year I choose to finally after abandoning what many deem as the epic fantasy of all time. There is no doubt about it because the characters and themes of this grandly surreal world has filtered through our pop culture radar ever since the books were first published. Many films have tried to capture the magic of Tolkien's world. For example, Tolkien's books are the models of fantasy for George Lucas's own "Star Wars" trilogy. I love stories about goblins, ogres, fire-breathing dragons, unicorns, etc. "Lord of the Rings" is an often breathtaking film adaptation but it is curiously overdone and remote, and I can't say that is true of "Star Wars," as unfair a comparison as it may be. Tolkien's world, known as Middle-Earth, is entirely imaginary and comprised of creatures and sounds and sights entirely not out of our own world. There are the Hobbits, the good-natured, good-hearted, fondly talkative, hairy-footed, pointy-eared people who are about as tall as dwarves. They can live for years and years, as they do chatting it up, smoking herbs and eating merrily in their private world of Shire. The hobbit of pure heart in this story is Frodo Baggins (a perfectly well-cast Elijah Wood), who embarks on an adventure to bring a powerful ring, known as the One Ring, to the fires of Mount Doom and destroy it, once and for all time. Easier said than done. Is Frodo up to the challenge? There are wizards in this world as well. There is the good wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen) and an evil wizard named Saruman (Christopher Lee) who wants the ring, as most of the characters do. There are storms of faceless horsemen riding in stallions and stampeding through Middle-Earth looking for Frodo. It is Gandalf who tells Frodo to carry the ring, rather than Frodo's uncle Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm) who might be a tad greedy. After all, this Ring can make men and women do strange things - you need will power to use the Ring wisely. Not unlike the Force. Along this perilous journey, Frodo is accompanied by three Hobbit friends, Sam (Sean Astin), Mercy (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd). Of course, Hobbits can only do so much damage in actual combat. Also along for the ride are the members of the Fellowship, which include Boromir (Sean Bean), the dwarf Gimli (John Rhys-Davies), Legolas (Orlando Bloom), an archery elf expert, and the mysterious, aloof Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen). Together their journey lasts through several different lands of beauty, endless caves, cascading waterfalls, a battle with a tree troll, a flaming duel with a vicious dragon known as Balrog, and so on. There are also more characters who pop up including the serene queen of elves Lady Galadriel (Cate Blanchett), the serene, dreamy elf Arwen (Liv Tyler), and more and more creatures such as Orcs and the ring wraiths, known as Nazgul, who gallop around in stallions that shriek. These silhouetted Black Riders are as fearsome as the Headless Horseman. Director Peter Jackson ("Heavenly Creatures") does a massively complicated job of bringing all these characters and vistas together in a film that tops the three-hour mark. There is so much to take in and cherish in "Lord of the Rings" that it is no wonder it will take two more movies to bring closure to all the incidents and events. It is like a gloriously illustrated picture book come to life. Jackson and his band of set designers and special-effects artists spare no expense in creating this fictional world. But if I am afforded the luxury of reviewing this film, I can honestly say that "Lord of the Rings" is deeply imaginative but at its core, somehow uninvolving. Jackson affords his actors the luxury of close-ups and there are so many in the film that there is nothing left to look at. You can only see Wood's beatific and worried Frodo face with wide blue eyes so often before it becomes repetitive. McKellen is a force-of-nature on film so I was not displeased with seeing his face so closely, but what of any close-up shots of Christopher Lee, the dueling wizard? More scenes where we see the interior of Bilbo Baggins's house were needed. These shots work because they are shown as master shots for the most part. Why we can't ever see a hobbit standing next to any of the taller characters for more than three seconds is beyond me. A hobbit has those hairy feet and pointy-ears, and I do not recall a single shot where we would see a hobbit walking through a given space showing his whole body. This may have been done to evoke how small the hobbits were but there are ways of conveying stature and size without all those random close-ups. Just like "Harry Potter," Jackson never quite shows the grandeur, the mysticism of Middle-Earth. He too often cuts away from expansive long-shots to extreme, tight close-ups. When the camera swoops up and down in territories and castles, we notice them fleetingly but never long enough to feel like we are in them. It's as if Jackson felt that audiences might get bored at any given moment so he had to keep cutting away and show us an action scene and bring the Dolby noise level higher and higher. The action scenes are also a disappointment. Just as in "Harry Potter" and any action film post-"Gladiator," everything is shot so tight that the fighting remains a series of blurry shots, nothing more. Jackson could have looked at those amazing fight scenes in Errol Flynn's "Adventures of Robin Hood" where we would always see the action in full shots and where the close-ups would occur when necessary. Here, everything is shot so tightly that unless you listen to the sound effects, it is never clear who is winning or losing in any of the countless sword fights (and no, I was not sitting too close to the screen). So all the sound and fury swallows up the screen in extremely fast edits that lose our focus as to what is occurring. The more intimate, quiet moments are beautifully done, as in the exquisite moment where Arwen tries to save Frodo from dying, but more often than not, they do not involve us. It is all magical to be sure but a fantasy epic often prides itself on engaging the viewer from moment to moment by seeing the fantastical settings as a backdrop for the characters. I do urge people to see "Lord of the Rings" but I feel that it could have been so much more. Peter Jackson is a frenetic director to be sure but he needs to dial down the heat a bit. Tolkien fans may not care much but I prefer more intimacy in this epic than confounding action scenes. I like the characters, the situations, the landscapes (as brief as they may be), the varied color lighting schemes, and the dialogue. It is just too cramped and overheated to qualify as anything more than a decent epic. For more reviews, check out JERRY AT THE MOVIES at http://moviething.com/members/movies/faust/JATMindex.shtml E-mail me with any questions, comments or general complaints at faustus_08520@yahoo.com or at Faust668@aol.com ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30693 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 276604 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 875 X-RT-AuthorID: 1314 X-RT-RatingText: 3/4 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sat Jan 5 16:01:36 2002 From: Christian Pyle Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 20:21:58 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30695 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 276607 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-AuthorID: 1057 X-RT-RatingText: A Summary: r.a.m.r. #30695 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 72 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!news.kth.se!uio.no!66.40.56.40.MISMATCH!hub1.nntpserver.com!xmission!news-hog.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-01!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2647 rec.arts.sf.reviews:196 The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring Reviewed by Christian Pyle Directed by Peter Jackson Written by Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, and Peter Jackson (based on the novel by J. R. R. Tolkien) Starring Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen, Viggo Mortensen, Sean Astin, Liv Tyler, Cate Blanchett, Sean Bean, and Christopher Lee Grade: A Let's get it out of the way right now: I'm the only nerd in America who hasn't read Tolkien. One reason I avoided those books was that they seemed so intimidating, especially since there were always a half-dozen "guides to the Tolkien universe" on the bookstore shelf beside them. Thus I was worried about seeing "The Fellowship of the Ring," the first in a series of three films to be released annually. Although there were a few places where the dialogue was loaded with Tolkien jargon and incomprehensible to the uninitiated, I was riveted to "Fellowship" from start to finish. The plot concerns a magic ring created by an evil creature named Sauron centuries ago. This ring can control all the other magic rings in Middle Earth, and it seduces wearers to evil. Decades ago the ring came into the possession of a hobbit, Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm). Now, just as Sauron is waking up after a long slumber, Bilbo passes the ring along to his nephew Frodo (Elijah Wood). Frodo soon finds himself pursued by ringwraiths (Sauron's henchmen) who want the ring back. Much running and fighting ensues. Frodo discovers that the only way to keep the ring away from Sauron is to take it back to the Mount of Doom, where it was forged, and cast it into the fires. Getting there is a perilous journey, so a fellowship is formed to aid Frodo. This Fellowship of the Ring includes a wise wizard named Gandalf (Ian McKellen), three hobbit pals (Sean Astin, Billy Boyd, and Dominic Monaghan), two humans (Viggo Mortensen and Sean Bean), an elf archer (Orlando Bloom), and a cranky dwarf (John Rhys-Davies). Leading the opposition is an evil wizard, Saruman (Christopher Lee), who raises an army of monsters to pursue the heroes. Director Peter Jackson, whose previous work has ranged from the indie suspense of "Heavenly Creatures" to the goofiness of "The Frighteners," creates a mythical world that seems both believable and fantastic. State-of-the-art computer-generated effects create vast armies and spectacular locations. Even more impressive, Jackson draws on old school trick photography to create some effects. For example, the hobbits are supposed to be about half the size of Gandalf, and Jackson creates this illusion partly through the use of forced perspective (placing the "tall" character close to the camera and the "short" character farther away). Elijah Wood is the heart and soul of the film. He still has the wide-eyed boyish charm that made him a likable child actor, and that quality works perfectly for the young pure-hearted hero who manages to resist evil while everyone else is tempted. Another standout performance comes from Sean Astin (of "Rudy" and "The Goonies"); as Frodo's best friend Samwise Gamgee, Astin plays Sam's bravery and devotion with a disarming earnestness. Be warned that this is "Episode One" of a trilogy that will continue in December 2002 with "The Two Towers" and conclude in December 2003 with "The Return of the King." Although "Fellowship" reaches a climax, it's major conflicts are left unresolved. However, when the complete trilogy is available, I predict that it will join "The Wizard of Oz" and "Star Wars" in the pantheon of fantasy films. © 2002 Christian L. Pyle ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30695 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 276607 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-AuthorID: 1057 X-RT-RatingText: A From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sun Feb 17 17:49:21 2002 From: Aahz Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 18:17:42 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30772 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 278592 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-AuthorID: 4730 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30772 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 97 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!newsfeed1.wineasy.se!newsfeed2.wineasy.se!newsfeed.song.fi!nntp.inet.fi!inet.fi!newsfeed4.cidera.com!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!newsfeed.cwix.com!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2720 rec.arts.sf.reviews:201 [Warning: mega-spoilers for both versions of _Lord of the Rings] Comparison of _Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring_ (2001, live action, directed by Peter Jackson) versus _Lord of the Rings_ (1978, animated, directed by Ralph Bakshi) Reviewed by Aahz, aahz@pobox.com, copyright 2002 After watching Jackson's LotR, my primary and I watched Bakshi's version on DVD. Where I was moderately unhappy with Jackson originally, now I think that Jackson truly squandered his opportunity. Before I start ripping Jackson to shreds, let me start with the one thing he did right: visually, Jackson has it all over Bakshi. The Jackson version is just plain beautiful, Jackson does a good job with characters (particularly given that he had to find live actors) and a brilliant job with their costumes, Jackson's scenery is compelling, the settings (most notably the Shire) are just plain Right, and the Balrog is magnificent. I do like the visuals in Bakshi, don't get me wrong. I think Bakshi overall did better with the look of the hobbits and Boromir, and I like Bakshi's conception of the Riders better. But I'll happily concede the visuals to Jackson because I can condemn him on so many other grounds. (Historically, many reviewers have disliked Bakshi because of the rotoscoping, but I like it.) Where Bakshi does better: despite a shorter run length and covering 1.5 books (to Jackson's one book), Bakshi manages to cram in much more of Tolkien's dialog and writing. Credit for this I think is due particularly to Peter Beagle, who co-wrote the screenplay. Beagle has more than earned his own chops as a fantasy writer who cares about language, and this care is evident in the way that he pushes as much of Tolkien into Bakshi as can possibly fit. One technique that Bakshi uses is to have character dialog or book narration during travel sequences. There are three critical points where Bakshi's variation absolutely trumps Jackson in creating the feel of the book: when Merry/Pippin make clear that they're going with Frodo to Rivendell, when Frodo confronts the Riders at the ford, and the council at Rivendell. But all through Bakshi, my primary and I were going "YES!" whenever we heard some important bit of Tolkien that Jackson cut. Then there's the problem of Jackson ADDING material. I'm not fond of giving Arwen so much screen time (Bakshi replaces Glorfindel with Legolas), but it's a compromise for modern sensibilities that I can live with. The parts that bug me the most are the council at Rivendell (that shouting match disgusts me) and the scene where Frodo drops the ring and Boromir picks it up. Jackson gives Saruman too much screen time; the schoolboy brawl between Saruman and Gandalf is at best undignified. The troll scene in Moria takes even more too much time and isn't particularly faithful, either. Finally, Jackson sees fit to completely remove the singing (yes, Jackson has a chorus in background, but you can't ever actually hear the words, which is what counts). Oh, and let's not even talk about stupid little bits in Jackson, like Sting glowing when Glamdring doesn't, or when Frodo is visible on the river when he leaves the Fellowship (instead of being invisible). So many times when just following Tolkien would be as dramatic, Jackson futzes with things (e.g. the sequence where Boromir argues with Frodo over where to go with the ring). Bakshi does cut some bits that Jackson puts in. The Shire sequence is much shorter, and Farmer Maggot is completely chopped. Bakshi doesn't show the Moria lake monster getting disturbed. Several other bits of scenes are also abbreviated or chopped (no entrance or departure to Lothlorien, for example). And Bakshi makes a boo-boo when Glamdring breaks in the fight with the Balrog. All in all, Bakshi has problems, but if you want to see a movie that's relatively faithful to half of the books, it's your only choice. Bakshi is proof that it is possible; I'd dearly love to see a movie based on Bakshi's script with the Bakshi problems remedied. --- Aahz <*> (Copyright 2002 by aahz@pobox.com) Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://www.rahul.net/aahz/ Androgynous poly kinky vanilla queer het Pythonista Opinions are free. Go ahead, take one. ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30772 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 278592 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-AuthorID: 4730 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sun Feb 17 17:49:21 2002 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.ida.liu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!newsfeed.bahnhof.se!news-stob.telia.net!news-sto.telia.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: David N. Butterworth Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 19:29:19 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30784 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 278865 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 878 X-RT-AuthorID: 1393 X-RT-RatingText: 2.5/4 Summary: r.a.m.r. #30784 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 82 Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2734 rec.arts.sf.reviews:204 THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING A film review by David N. Butterworth Copyright 2002 David N. Butterworth **1/2 (out of ****) There's an amusing moment an hour or two into "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring," Peter Jackson's ambitious first of three part adaptations of J.R.R. Tolkien's classic trilogy about hairy-footed hobbits, glowing gold rings, and (generally speaking) good versus evil. Having stumbled into a "it's not a cave... it's a tomb!" riddled with corpses shortly before his gallant band of followers do battle with a large, angry squid, Gandalf the Grey (a well-cast Ian McKellen in a pointy hat) mentions that perhaps they can pass unnoticed from thereon out. Fat chance. Up until that point (and, as it turns out, thereafter), the film has been a very well made--and, at $270 million, a very expensive--tape loop. Entrusted with the security of a mysterious ring, Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood, proving he can open his eyes wider than Harry Potter's Daniel Radcliffe) is cavalier with the ring (tucking it into his loose fitting tunic, carrying it in his hand, or wearing it about his neck like a trinket), is hounded by the dark lords of Saruman (cowled demonic legions on sweaty horses), yet escapes to tell the tale. Rewind and repeat this, once or twice thereafter. Now this is most probably Tolkien's doing and not Jackson's (the New Zealander responsible for "Heavenly Creatures" and a handful of tasteless horror flicks--how on earth did he land this assignment?), since Jackson (like Potter's Chris Columbus before him) has promised to be true to the book(s). But it does make the experience of watching "The Lord of the Rings Part 1," the whole entire three-hour experience of watching "The Lord of the Rings Part 1" take note, a somewhat repetitive one. For repetition reigns supreme in "The Fellowship of the Ring." In the first hour alone there are so many close-ups of the ring itself that if Jackson had edited out half of them we'd be down to a two-hour movie, easy. Then there are the battle scenes: epic seeming at first, but soon kinda same-y. And among Middle-earth's many dangers are some familiar-looking monsters: the afore-mentioned tentacled beastie (from "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea"?), a Shrek-like troll (not unlike the Shrek-like troll in "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone") from the Mines of Moria, and Khazad-dum's generic horned demon that the fellowshippers let Gandalf deal with, and then inexplicably forget to offer him assistance! If this all makes it sound like I didn't enjoy the film I did. It's extremely entertaining and, unlike many past and present effects-laden extravaganzas, the filmmakers have spent equal amounts of non-CGI time developing their characters, from the 111-year-old Bilbo Baggins (a digitally-reduced Ian Holm), who first discovers the ring, to the wizardly Gandalf himself, plus a smattering of elves, dwarves, and warriors (among them Liv Tyler, Cate Blanchett, Viggo Mortensen, Sean Bean, and John Rhys-Davies). The dark stuff, on and around the Mountain of Doom, is especially well done (except for the part when Gandalf and Christopher Lee's Saruman the White wave sticks at one another). I just wish the story elements didn't keep recycling themselves with such regularity, and that Frodo wouldn't handle the titular gold band so recklessly so much of the time. Handsomely mounted, "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" is nevertheless a faithful and lavish production that, despite its frequent forays into repetitiveness, fans of J.R.R. Tolkien--and others--should thoroughly enjoy. -- David N. Butterworth dnb@dca.net Got beef? Visit "La Movie Boeuf" online at http://members.dca.net/dnb ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30784 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 278865 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 878 X-RT-AuthorID: 1393 X-RT-RatingText: 2.5/4 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Sun Feb 17 17:49:21 2002 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.ida.liu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!news.kth.se!uio.no!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!212.177.105.133!news.mailgate.org!out.nntp.be!propagator-SanJose!in.nntp.be!lackawana.kippona.com!paradoxa.ogoense.net!sn-xit-04!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: Eugene Novikov Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Review: Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.current-films Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2002 20:16:01 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 30943 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 283447 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 610 X-RT-AuthorID: 1577 X-RT-RatingText: A Summary: r.a.m.r. #30943 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 123 Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:2866 rec.arts.sf.reviews:212 The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) Reviewed by Eugene Novikov http://www.ultimate-movie.com/ "One ring to rule them all One ring to find them One ring to bring them all And in the darkness bind them." *SPOILERS AHEAD* Starring Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen, Sean Astin, Ian Holm, Christopher Lee, Dominic Monaghan, Billy Boyd, Orlando Bloom, Sean Bean, Viggo Mortensen, Liv Tyler, Cate Blanchett, John Rhys-Davies, Andy Serkis, Hugo Weaving. Directed by Peter Jackson. Rated PG-13. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, the first installment in the trilogy entrusted to New Zealander Peter Jackson, is exactly the movie that Tolkien's wondrous fantasy work deserves; an enchanting, elaborate adventure movie that runs for 180 minutes and feels like it's about half that. You can almost hear a maniacal, frizzy-haired Peter Jackson screaming "Behold!" from behind the screen, and the air of almost arrogant grandeur that fills this production is justified by its faithfulness to the endearingly pompous source material. Middle-Earth has never looked so enticing, frightening, wonderful and terrible. The film opens with haunting -- and helpful -- exposition, in which the voice of Liv Tyler tells of the forging of the Great Ring of Power by the Dark Lord Sauron, and of how it would eventually fall into the unassuming hands of an innocent hobbit from a quiet part of Middle-Earth called the Shire. That hobbit -- Bilbo Baggins, played by Ian Holm -- would leave it in the care of another hobbit, Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), the hero of our trilogy. He is to be burdened with the task of destroying the ring to prevent Middle-Earth from falling under the shadow. The only way the ring can be destroyed is by being cast back into the fires that made it, the fires of Mount Doom in the heart of Sauron's kingdom. He joins a fellowship of nine for the journey into Mordor. His companions -- the great warrior Boromir (Sean Bean), the mysterious Strider (Viggo Mortensen), the elf Legolas (Orlando Bloom), the dwarf Gimli (John Rhys-Davies), hobbits Peregrin Took, Merry Brandibuck and Samwise Gamgee (Dominic Monaghan, Billy Boyd and Sean Astin), and, leading them, the wise wizard Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen) -- are all charged with protecting Frodo at all costs, but if push comes to shove, it is Frodo and Frodo alone who must complete the quest. And that's what makes The Lord of the Rings such a classic: the archetypical story of the little guy forced into a hero's quest, the underdog who beats the odds and does great things. In Tolkien's hands, the tale became a grandly eloquent magnum opus, surrounding Frodo with all sorts of things scary and fantastic. Frodo and his hobbit pals are constantly in over their heads, little dots in the shadow of creatures and forces beyond their control, yet they emerge as the steadfast, unassumingly chivalrous heroes that legends are made of. Jackson turns the book into an incredible visual experience. This is impressive because Tolkien's prose is such that the events that would lend themselves to looking impressive on screen fit neatly into a paragraph, or a sentence or two. The film's biggest achievement is retaining the tone of the writing while being an enchanting, entertaining blockbuster; it should please Tolkien devotees as well as Rings virgins. Many have griped that certain parts are excised -- Tom Bombadil, for example, is nowhere to be found -- but these are the gripings of obsessed fanboys; smart viewers will understand the dilemma Jackson was faced with and acknowledge the 1st law of adaptations: books are not movies. By the film's climax, the extended sequence by the river that concludes in the breaking of the fellowship, I felt like Jackson was channeling the power and grandeur that has enthralled millions of readers. The death of Boromir, in particular, packs an unexpected wallop; an apocalyptic event made all the more affecting by the Sean Bean's quietly inspired performance. Sir Ian McKellan is perfect as Gandalf the Gray, and little-known veteran Christopher Lee provides a nice foil for him as the evil Saruman the White. As for Elijah Wood, well... he looks the part, but I think I'll have to wait until at least part two to actually judge his performance. The Fellowship of the Rings is a long movie, but as with Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, I felt like I could have sat for three times as long had the next two installments followed immediately. Peter Jackson has crafted pure magic, an epic that will not be forgotten. *Insert Elvish phrase here* Grade: A Up Next: A Beautiful Mind ©2001 Eugene Novikov ========== X-RAMR-ID: 30943 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 283447 X-RT-TitleID: 1108476 X-RT-SourceID: 610 X-RT-AuthorID: 1577 X-RT-RatingText: A