Lord of the Rings

The Lord of the Rings trilogy is the closest this generation has to Star Wars, and is even more ambitious an achievement. Three films, shot back-to-back, released in successive years is something few Hollywood producers would dare to attempt - so leave it for the New Zealander Peter Jackson to try. Throw in a cast of phenomenal actors, some of the most impressive visual effects in film history, huge box-office takes and a boatload of awards, and you've got a genuine phenomenon. Does that make the films any good?

Lord of the Rings has the handicap of bringing a much-garlanded series of novels to the screen. Adapitng such labrynthian and complex source material as JRR Tolkien's work runs the risk of disappointing Tolkien fans, alienating newcomers and just overreaching. (Remember Dune?) Jackson and Company do an admirable job. Mercifully free of contemporary social commentary or bombast, the films are rousing adventures on a grand scale.

Significant praise must be given to Jackson and his creative team for bringing Middle Earth to life. Between them, they create a marvellous, forbidding world. Impressive CGI work, motion-capture, make-up and location shooting create a truly gobsmacking spectacle, a magical yet frightening world that certainly seems real. At times, Jackson throws a few too many beasties our way, but they're all believably part of the film's universe. Howard Shore's excellent score also helps things along. Technically, there is nothing to complain about.

The huge cast is also a plus. Elijah Wood is a perfect Everyman protagonist. He remains compelling throughout the series, never less than likeable, and his inner conflicts and are more compelling than his more colorful colleagues. Sean Astin is equally good as Samwise, his devoted companion. The more conventionally heroic Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) becomes rather a boring character, turning from a reluctant hero to a sword-wielding Superman. The minimally-talented Liv Tyler and Orlando Bloom are well-used in limited roles. An imposing cast of veteran talent supports them: Ian McKellen, Christopher Lee, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving, John Rhys-Davies, Brad Dourif, Bernard Hill, Ian Holm.

That's not to say that the films are without flaws. Often, the attempts to juggle three-to-four main plot lines and various interlocking subplots overwhelm the storytelling. Not every character or subplot is equally compelling or well-developed, much to the story's detriment. When everything else flags, the movies fall back on oft-repetitive battle scenes. Some are really impressive, but whether by nature or execution, many of them are redundant, no matter how many dragons and ghost armies and "oliphaunts" are thrown at us.

With our general comments out of the way, let us briefly consider each specific film.

The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

Fellowship is, above all else, a red-blooded adventure film. Largely plot-driven, it's nonetheless crisply paced and relentlessly entertaining. It lacks the labrynthian plot mechanics of its sequels, which is certainly to its benefit, and its straightforward story and action make it compulsively entertaining. It's not without its flaws, but it's by far the most accessible of the three films.

Burdened with dispensing lots of backstory, Jackson and Co. have an effective opening narration and montage cribbing from The Hobbit, and the film takes its time establishing its huge cast of characters. Gandalf (Ian McKellan), Frodo and Sam register most strongly: the story is focused mostly on them, and their adventures are here concurrent with Aragorn and Company. Scenes with Bilbo (Ian Holm), Gollum (Andy Serkis) and Boromir (Sean Bean) establish the power and of the ring, an evil, all-consuming force. The Elf characters - Arwen (Liv Tyler), Elrond (Hugo Weaving), Galadriel (Cate Blanchett) - get far more to do than in the sequels. Mortensen and Tyler's romance is alright, though it remains underdeveloped throughout the series.

Of course, this isn't to say the story is all plot: there a number of impressive action sequences, particularly Boromir and Aragorn's stand against a horde of Orcs and Uruk-hai. Lots of ground is covered, from the verdant green Shire to forbidding Mountains and crypts, and there's little lingering. The most impressive effects involve Frodo's visitations by the Ring Wraiths, and the forbidding mines of Isengard, where Sarumann (Christopher Lee) literally constructs his evil army. The film ends with a perfect hook for the sequel: this thrilling adventure is just a lead-in to the next movies, and by gum, we're excited.

Sean Bean (GoldenEye) gets the juiciest role; his Boromir, torn between wanting to do the right thing and his greed for the ring, is a compelling and tragic character despite his lack of screen time. Ian Holm (Alien) does equally well with a fairly limited role, and Christopher Lee is a menacing villain sidelined in the sequels.

The Two Towers (2002)

The Two Towers may be the best of the lot. It does the best job of the three films in balancing story and action, as the menace of Saruman becomes real, and the denizens of Middle Earth - Elf, Man and otherwise - are forced to take sides in the upcoming war. Rich in characterization and plotting, it also has a number of (mostly) well-done battle sequences.

The film is a series of fairly-modest action scenes building up to the epic Battle of Helm's Deep, where King Theoden (Bernard Hill) and Aragorn beat off a huge army of Orcs and Uruk-hai. This long sequence serves as the focal point of the entire film, and it's extremely impressive as its builds in desperation and intensity. CGI or no, it's extremely impressive, and certainly among the best battle scenes of the decade.

Jackson balances the many subplots as best as can be expected. The best scenes are those with Frodo, Sam and Gollum making their way to Mordor, with Frodo starting to fall under the ring's sway and Gollum torn between his obsession for the ring and desire for redemption. The plot with King Theoden, bewitched by Saruman and his henchman Wormtongue (Brad Dourif), is equally well-handled. As mentioned above, Aragorn starts to become a rather bland, conventional hero, and his tepid romance with Theoden's niece (Miranda Otto) doesn't help matters. A subplot involving the Ents, a group of benign tree spirits, and the idiot Hobbits Merry and Pippin (Dominic Monahan and Billy Boyd) goes on too long, though at least they contribute to the story. The arrival of Boromir's brother Faramir (David Wenham) comes too late and adds little to the film.

Taking home acting honors in this installment are Bernard Hill (Valkyrie) as the conflicted King Theoden, and Andy Serkis. His oft-parodied Gollum character remains a fascinating creation, both in the excellent motion-capture work and the torment and turmoil of the character himself. Interest certainly never flags when attention is on Frodo, Sam and Gollum; after all, it is primarily their quest. And this time around, at least, the larger picture is equally compelling.

Return of the King (2003)

Return of the King is the final and largest installment of the trilogy, and also the weakest. Mostly relieved of the need for plot and set-up, Jackson delivers a 200-minute action extravaganza, with mixed results. The movie is very heavy on action and effects, often to its detriment: three-plus hours of Aragorn and company hacking their way through computer-generated creatures gets old before long. Worse, Frodo, Sam and Gollum are side-lined for much of the adventure - a pity, as they remain as interesting as before, and the climax in Mt. Doom, where Frodo tries to finally destroy the ring, is excellent.

With its fifty-six subplots - not only Theoden's troubles, also Denethor (John Noble) and Faramir's hand-wringing - this movie goes beyond being complex and ultimately becomes convoluted. The film begins with a superfluous scene of Gollum's backstory; we've already seen what the ring can do, time and again, and this bit is useless. Saruman is completely absent from the film, and aside from Gollum there's no strong antagonist, a definite drawback. Deus ex machina like the invincible ghost army which comes to Gondor's rescue may be Tolkien's intention, but on film it does not come off well at all.

To add insult to injury, the film ends with a round-robin of "endings" that cheats the viewer. Just when we're ready to turn the player off and go out in the sunlight, Jackson throws one more scene at the viewer... and does it again. This half-hour bait-and-switch is baffling and frustrating, and left this viewer with a bitter taste in the mouth.

Final Verdict:

Lord of the Rings is a solid, entertaining trilogy that runs a bit long in the tooth. The achievement and scope often outweigh the enjoyment factor, particularly in the last installment, but the films are generally as good as a blockbuster can get.