Posted on 11/27/2001 8:56:31 PM PST by sourcery
The Lord Of The Rings: The Fellowship Of The Ring
Cast (Major Roles Only)
Elijah Wood as Frodo Baggins
Sir Ian McKellen as Gandalf
Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn
Sir Ian Holm as Bilbo Baggins
Sean Astin as Sam Gamgee
Billy Boyd as Pippin Took
Dominic Monaghan as Merry Brandybuck
Orlando Bloom as Legolas
John Rhys-Davies as Gimli
John Rhys-Davies (voice) as Treebeard
Sean Bean as Boromir
Cate Blanchett as Galadriel
Liv Tyler as Arwen
Christopher Lee as Saruman
Brad Dourif as Grima Wormtongue
Andy Serkis (voice) as Smeagol (Gollum)
Director:
Peter Jackson
A review by Ronald Epstein
One ring to rule them all,
One ring to find them,
one ring to bring them all and in
the darkness bind them.
Published in 1954-1955, J.R.R. Tolkien's masterpiece Lord Of The Rings trilogy still remains one of the
most definitive works of imaginary fiction ever written. The extraordinary efforts to get this trilogy to
the screen is a testament of how popular these stories are today. New Line has taken a gamble and risked
everything by filming all three movies back-to-back without knowing the fate of the original release.
The Fellowship of the Ring is the very first of the Tolkien trilogy. It will be followed up with
The Two Towers (2002) and Return of the King (2003).
As release date slowly draws nearer, everyone is holding their breath. Will this film live up to expectations?
Will this movie make a strong enough impact that audiences will anxiously want to remain loyal to the
films that will follow? The answer is a definitive YES on all accounts.
Lord Of The Rings will make its mark in film history. Fans will embrace this film and newcomers will
be in complete awe of one of the most visually entertaining films ever made....and this is only the beginning!
The film begins with lengthy female narrative that tells the story of Middle Earth - the ancient land of elves,
dwarves, hobbits, wizards and other creatures. We are told of the creation of the individual rings that
were handed down to the wisest and most noblest creatures of Middle Earth. We are then told of the ONE
ring that was forged out of Mount Doom -- the ring that controlled all others -- worn by the dark and
evil Lord Sauren. We are told of a battle and the defeat of Sauren and how his ring is eventually lost
only to be found by Gollum, a lowly creature that gets poisoned by its power. The ring is eventually
stolen by hobbit named Bilbo Baggins. And so, this is where the trilogy begins.....
It's a beautiful day in the Shire, the peaceful home of the Hobbits. A carriage rolls through a lone road
that parts meadows of lush grass and farmland. It is Gandalf the Wizard visiting his old Hobbit friend,
Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm). It is Bilbo's birthday, and the old hobbit is more concerned about leaving the
Shire rather than partake in any party. Something is very heavy on Bilbo's mind, and Gandalf is watching
him closely. That evening, Bilbo's party is in full swing with some of the most amazing and beautiful firework
displays ever seen on film. When Bilbo makes a daring announcement to his party guests, Gandalf realizes that
Bilbo is in possession of a very important ring. Gandalf convinces Bilbo to give up the ring, and give it to
the very young Frodo (Elijah Wood). When the secret of the ring is finally revealed to the old Wizard, Frodo
is warned to leave the Shire at once. Hence, the adventure of a lifetime begins.
Clocking in at about 3 hours running length, Lord Of The Rings doesn't waste time. Every minute of
the film is used to remain as faithful to the book as possible. The most important aspect of this film is
that it had to properly tell the story as written. The end result is that this film becomes a definitive
and accurate recreation of the story.
Though it had been 20 years since I last read the trilogy, the film brought back every single memory I had
of the story with visuals that exceeded my own imagination. You will see visuals in this film that go beyond
anything you have seen before. The film is visually beautiful as we travel through the lush green grasses
of the Shire with the huts built into the hills, or, the beautiful mountain village of Rivendell, inhabited
by the Elves. With so much beauty also comes the darkness of Mordor and Mount Doom so grimly recreated
with cameras that swoop into the lowest depths of these locations as we watch armies of death manufacturer
weapons as they grow, amass, and hunt the one that holds the ring.
Make no mistake about it, this film is very dark. The most terrifying creatures of Middle Earth are
realistically brought to life. Whether it be the Ringwraiths, dark riders who are neither dead or alive
or the armies of orcs who inhabit the Mountains of the Dwarf kingdom, this movie manages to keep your
heart racing with scene after scene of edge-of-the-seat battles set to sweeping music of Howard Shore.
I have two favorite sequences in this movie. One involves a duel between Gandalf (Ian Holm) and the
elder wizard, Saruman (Christopher Lee). With each Wizard testing their powers against each other,
the duel becomes one of the most memorable scenes of the film as we see Gandalf helplessly spinning
around the floor. Another favorite sequence involves Frodo putting the ring on his finger and not
only becoming invisible to the outside world, but being visible to the inner world of darkness. These
effect sequences are creatively reproduced on screen to the point where you get chills running down
your spine.
The biggest hurdles that New Line faces with Lord Of The Rings is the 3-hour running time and
the fact that this is not a film that is going to appeal to all audiences. While the fans who read
the original books are going to be enthralled with its faithfulness to the book, I couldn't help but
hear many women of the audience talking afterwards about how much they were unimpressed by the whole
film. Fans of the books and Fantasy films alike are in for the treat of their lives. Lord Of The Rings
has accomplished what many thought was the impossible -- to bring a live-action film to the screen
that accurately portrays the books as written, with enough visual eyes candy and engrossing battle scenes
that could very well make this the STAR WARS trilogy of the new century.
On a scale of 1-5, I give this film a 5.
Opens December 18th, 2001
J.R.R. Tolkien wrote that he distained allegory, but many people thought that the novels referenced the fight against the Germans in WWI and II. Parts of LOTR were written as serials sent off to his son who was in combat in WWII.
Others have suggested that the wizards represent the prophets giving guidance to the hobbits, who represent normal folks, who one day have to rise up and fight evil on their own without relying on others to do so for them.
There is no doubt that Tolkien was christian, and that he and his good friend C.S. Lewis, wrote some lovely work.
I think we're all scared for your children's sanity... but not because of LOTR!
Dan
(c;
I think you hit the nail on the head (so to speak). I got some fans a bit heated at me when I pointed this out in another LOTR thread. Check it out: Young boy places himself in old man's hands... (not a pee wee herman thread!)
Mark W.
I understand that some changes are necessary to translate 1500 pages into 3 movies, but as long as they don't replace major characters I'm fine. Eliminating Bombadil makes sense, generally, though they will then need to explain where the hobbits' swords/knives come from since there can be no barrow wight now.
Thank God for That!
I'm sure others feel the same way I do about this upcoming film. I've waited for this since 1974 when I first read the Trilogy. Then I proceeded to read the Hobbit and then the Silmarillian and then other materials by Tolkien or others. I'm patiently awaiting the Dec 19th debut. I think Peter Jackson did it as good as it can get. Bravo - premature - but BRAVO anyway!
The Trilogy is absolutely spellbinding. Women tend to be quite dull, unless they happen to be strong like Maggie Thatcher or mostly naked like Britney Spears , and there are few strong women in real life, so it is no suprise that the same sex that endowed Bradd Pitt with stardom might want to take a pass on this movie.
A woman's idea of exitement is being told by a man what to do, after waiting around doing nothing.
I'm wondering, do you think I'll get flamed?
LOL. Yep, there is. But if I got off on kissing boys, I'd be able to face up to it. I don't, so I don't have to repress & project any fantasies. Besides, if this were my projection, then Hollywood wouldn't be promoting LOTR with shots of Elijah Wood that look more like a girl than the chicks from Lilith Fair!
Mark W.
Thom Bombadil!
Thom, Thom, Merry Thom, merry Thom-a-dillo, Thom, Thom, Happy Thom, Thom Bom-bad-illo!
Thom is larger than life in his short part of the story, and in his own way one of the most powerfull charactors in the series. The Magic of the Ring has no effect on him at all.
I, too, went on to love the Ring trilogy. In fact, I read the books aloud to my kids (2 girls and a boy) when they were fairly young. Needless to say, at the rate of a few pages a night, this took quite some time. They loved it, although occasionally I had to abridge or summarize some of the description and move along to the action when I felt that the younger two were getting restless.
I agree that most of what passes for "women's literature" is either sappy or ugly, or, if one is really unlucky, a combination of the two. I realize that we are in no way responsible for the tastes of all other women, but it's still a puzzlement to me.
This epic is about a titanic clash of VIRTUE and VICE. It is chivalry and honor in a struggle for survival against the tyranny of absolute evil. It is "white knights" and "damsels". If chivalry is no longer a virtue then this is a meaningless, dated story. I believe the women in the story are real heroines. Women whose virtue is worthy of imitation. It is not a modern romance story, but it is a great romantic piece in the true sense of the word.
Read on AuntToots, I think you'll get into eventually.
This is our big chance people. Here on FR in every movie discussion you encounter you'll find the hoardes of people complaining about all the filth that Hollywood produces, the sex, the gratuitous violence, the foul language. You, we, want more Iron Giants and fewer Pulp Fictions. And you protest and you write letters and you complain and you boycott. But there's one thing you don't do: spend money on the movies you want more of. Hollywood doesn't care if you protest, actually they like it, that's free advertising (the holy grail of Hollywood is "no such thing as bad press", keep this in mind Potter bashers). They light cigars with your letter what they care about is money. When a movie makes a lot of money you will see a lot of movies like it, when it doesn't projects get canceled.
Look what happened in the mid 90s, we had Pulp Fiction that bloody swear fest (which I happened to like but that's for another day) made MONEY, lots of MONEY. So what followed, tons of tons of wannabe Tarantinos making movies with people killing each other, most of the clones sucked because the didn't understand why Pulp Fiction was cool (Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels is, IMHO, better a being Pulp Fiction than Pulp Fiction), but Hollywood didn't care they were riding a gravy train.
During the time of the PF-clones out came The Iron Giant, great family values animated movie, a little anti-gun but not really. Solid morals, no swearing, no blood and guts and very nicely animated. Hands down one of the best movies of the year (especially if good conservative values are your primary grading point). Also a total and complete flop, made no money, out of the theaters in two or three weeks, merchandising went nowhere. The message that was sent to Hollywood was that nobody really wanted family values movies, or at least not enough people to make it worth their while.
Even "low budget" movies cost a lot of money to make, then advertising and distribution costs generally double the outlay expense, Hollywood isn't going to put that kind of money on the line for proven flops. So what needs to happen, if you really want more family values movies, is to spend money. See the movie, buy the movie guide, buy the "movie versions" of the paperback (the ones that will have the movie posters as the cover), buy the toys for your little ones (or yourself, never to old to dig toys, that's what my yo-yo collection says). Spend spend spend, make these movies earn earn earn. Because here's your chance to tell Hollywood that a movie with strong Christian values, based on a book by a Christian author, can be profitable even if it's a really expensive special effects extravaganza.
Of course it doesn't stop here. You've got to keep your eye out for the next good movie and make sure that earns too. If you want more Iron Giants than Pulp Fictions you've got to make the Iron Giants more profitable than the Pulp Fictions, constistently and regularly. Because the only thing that Hollywood listens to is money, anything that doesn't effect the bottom line is just background noise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.