Like last year, I attended one of the first showings. Not THE first -- this year they sneaked in a midnight showing so that only the very dilligent would catch the big premiere. Nevertheless, I was there early, and had the chance to observe quite a parade of hand-made costumes of various quality, making me wish I had brought my camera. It was also an audience ready to cheer and applaud at key moments, which made it all the more entertaining.
So okay -- the two towers, of course, are Barad Dur and its unholy "ally", Orthanc -- as if we hadn't figured it out. The first thing you hear is silence, then distant, muffled voices. You scan over the snowy peaks of the Misty Mountains and are instantly taken back to the moment when Gandalf confronts the Balrog and is pulled into the chasm behind him. What follows is a breathtaking, mouth-hanging-open, nail-biting battle in the dark as Gandalf, not unlike a Jedi Knight with a light sabre, struggles with the Balrog, tackles it head on, and destroys it. And that, my friends, sets the tone for this fast-moving action-packed second act in the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. It was a scene I had personally looked forward to seeing, and was not disappointed.
This kind of thing characterizes "The Two Towers". Hobbits escaping from Urak-Hai, The remainder of the original Fellowship seeking them at a breakneck speed, the meeting of the Riders of Rohan, the Battle of Helm's Deep, the fleeing of refugees, the Battle of Osgilith, etc. Even my husband, who is into war movies, said that these are some of the best battle scenes he has ever seen, and he was on the edge of his seat. Action is the word that best describes much of what happens in the three hours you spend in the theater.
So many things happen in this film that I am hard put to know where to start. We get to watch, of course, the character developement of the surviving Fellowship partners. Gone are the days of the funny little Hobbits we loved so much in the first film. From now on out, the game is for keeps, and our four Hobbits know it. Pippin is showing for the first time that he has a brain, and Merry is swiftly becoming the grim warrior that we will see in "Return of the King". They will clearly never be the same again. They also have a new friend in the delightful old Ent, Treebeard -- who is both different from how I imagined him,and yet exactly how I thought he should be. In fact, the Battle of the Ents at the end of the film is another one of those great Tolkien moments that I have been anticipating.
Frodo and Sam, the heroes of the story, have changed much from their former selves. Like Isildur, Gollum, and Bilbo before him, the Ring is preying on Frodo's mind more and more, threatening to eventually possess him. And we finally get to truly meet the sixth Hobbit of this saga -- or should he be the second, since we met him soon after meeting Bilbo in "The Hobbit". Frodo recognizes immediately his kinship to the tragic, pathetic Gollum/Smaegol, and even says, "Why, you're one of the River People, not much different from us," - a reference to the stoorish Hobbits who live up river from the Shire. I found it fascinating to watch the relationship between these two Ringbearers developing, and at times feeling annoyed with Sam for his abrasive treatment of the poor thing, which ( if the book is followed faithfully ) will cause the final, irrevocable rift between Frodo and Smaegol. Poor Smaegol is a wretched, sympathetic creature -- that is, until at the very end of the film we hear him utter the chilling words,"Maybe SHE can do it..." And those of us who have read the books know full well what "she" is. But my strongest impression is of the momet when Frodo first looks into those big, sad, blue eyes and sees ... himself. He and Gollum are kindred souls, and both of them know it.
Gandalf the White was as impressive and God-like a figure as one could possibly wish for, with powers far greater than he ever had as Gandalf the Grey. If there is a flaw here, it is only because we see far too little of him, and more of his power than his charm. Many of his "Two Towers" scenes are obviously being pushed into "Return of the King" for next year. Indeed, there are many scenes that will not appear until then, just as the battle for Osgiliath was pulled back from "Return of the King". A lot of the very intimate exchanges between Frodo and Sam as they scaled the passes of Cirith Ungol were re-edited into a revised version of their adventures with Faramir in Ilithien, which is too bad.
A great deal of the story centers around Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli and their hair-raising adventures searching for the Hobbits, and then their involvement with the fabulous Riders of Rohan. I enjoyed watching Legolas show off his horsemanship ( vaulting into the saddle with astonishing agility ) and firing off arrows as he literally skateboards down a ramp on the shield of an Uruk-Hai.
My favorite character this time around tuned out to be Gimli ! From the start, he was obviously going to be the comic relief of the film, even asking Aragorn to "toss" him into battle -- so long as Aragorn didn't "tell the Elf", and indulging in a conversation with Princess Eowyn about the beauties of Dwarvish women, who look a lot like the men ( I like Aragorn making a joke than maybe Dwarf women have beards ). Although there are some signs of it developing, the fast friendship between Gimli and Legolas has yet to cement. I suppose that will also come in the next film.
Asde from the wonderful Ents, the newest players on the block are of course the Riders of Rohan. I have always been very fond of these guys -- like Vikings on horseback. The wonderful royal hall of Meduseld looks like the best possible place to hold a feast, and the ornate golden carvings are a feast for the eyes. What a grand site they are, sweeping down the 45 degree slope with horses that simply do NOT stumble ( and the fabled horses of Rohan are splendid -- where they are members of the family, their names as well known to the Riders as their human companions, strong, fast, smart, and loyal ),wearing green and gold and shining in the sun with Gandalf at their head. A resounding "Ho-yo to-ho" is clearly in order.
New to the already-long list of characters is King Theoden, long possessed by Saruman, and still unsure of himself. He emerges as a worthy king at the end. His nephew Eomer is a noble captain, but far more interesting is lovely Lady Eowyn, seen as a possible rival for Aragorn's hand, if not necessarily his affection. Indeed, much is drawn from the Appendixes to show that there is a serious struggle in Elrond's house over the future of his daughter and all that is at stake. We are also introduced to the slimey traitor, Grima "Wormtongue", long in service to Saruman in hope of gaining access to the royal treasury, perhaps even the throne itself, and the unwilling hand of Eowyn. And he is indeed -- very slimey. Ugh!
Last but not least is the arrival of Faramir, Boromir's younger brother, who captures the Hobbits and questions them, learning of their mission. I am not sure that I liked this Faramir, though -- because Tolkien's Faramir, while cautious and understandably suspicious, never set his sights on the Ring. This Faramir is all-too willing to bring Frodo and the Ring to Minas Tirith, to the waiting arms of his father, and falters only after overhearing Sam's words to Frodo during the skirmish at Osgiliath. I am hoping he will improve, because Boromir was far more likable.
So is there a downside to all of this? For those who have not read the books, there is liable to be some confusion about the rapidly changing scenes in the early parts of the movie. Missing from the film is a very important scene that was filmed, showing how Smeagol became Gollum, which is being pushed instead into "Return of the King". This was a sad ommission because it should have been considered critical to our understanding of how much Gollum and Frodo actually have in common.
The usual liberties have been taken for dramatic purposes, and none more noticably than the scenes with Frodo, Sam and Faramir. I personally felt that the intimacy of the closing chapters of the book was lost in the action, and can only hope that it will be restored in the third film --which I eagerly await. In fact, this film may have been hurt by the removal of Frodo and Sam's encounter with Shelob, which gave the original book a spine-chilling cliff-hanger that made the first-time reader run for the next volume to find out what happens next.
Quite possibly the film's one greatest flaw was that Tolkien's finely developed characters often took a back seat to the action. Perhaps this is one of the misfortunes of translating a novel to the screen; particlarly this novel. As I have said before, the only way to truly do this epic justice is to have a 30-part TV mini-series on the BBC in which each step of Tolkien's original story, each subtlety and nuance, can bemost fully explored. But then,for that we still have to look no farther than Tolkien's writings themselves.
All in all, this film was very entertaining and exciting, and with a few caviats, a worthy sequel to "The fellowship of the Ring".
When it first appeared on TV in 1978, it was met with a mixture of excitement and skepticism. And despite initial nay-sayers, this delightful little film has stood the test of time, and is loved by audiences everywhere.
There are problems, to be sure -- the abridgement of the original story isn't always successful, the elves are ugly and orcish with German accents, and the post-Vietname-era messages were not exactly what Tolkien intended. Nevertheless, there are so many good things in this film, that the faults are easy to forgive and overlook. Hans Conried and Cyril Ritchard both gave their final performances as Thorin Oakenshield and Elrond, and both are magnificent. John Huston is an authorative and kindly Gandalf, Orson Bean is superb as Bilbo Baggins, and Brother Theodore was perfectly grotesque as the voice of Gollum.
The artistic details of backgrounds and Middle Earth artifacts are scrupulously adhered to, so that even the most critical of fans will have trouble finding fault with them. Most of the action and narrative runs smooth, and the theme song, "Roads Go Ever, Ever On", is so memorable that many people consider it the perfect rendition of that famous verse.
All in all, this film has remained popular ever since, and has introduced countless people of all ages to the world of J.R.R.Tolkien. It deserves its place in the pantheon of animated classics.
Like "THE HOBBIT", this film was breathlessly anticipated by millions of Tolkien fans -- and just as breathlessly disappointing to all but a few.
Right from the start, it failed to live up to its publicity since its "innovative" animation turned out to be old-fashioned rotoscoping, and mostly uneven rotoscoping at that. In fairness, there are a few well-executed moments, and in several cenes is actually more true to Tolkien than the recent New Line Cinema films. But when it is bad, it is very bad indeed. The scenes with the Black Riders are mostly well done, but the battle scenes are lengthy and ponderously dull, rotoscoping over obvious footage of Zulus and Arabs, fer'goshsakes! In fact, few of the characters look good at all.
Bakshi tried to cram so much material into a single two hour film that we end up feeling cheated. It rushes over too much too fast, and newcomers get lost in many of the details. It assumes that the whole audience knows this story inside out, and that just makes the story incomprehensible. "The Fellowship of the Ring" portions are followed by the first half of "The Two Towers", leaving us on a clumsy cliff-hanger after a dreadfully boring rendition of the Battle of Helm's Deep.
The characters themselves fare very unevenly. The Hobbits are among the better characterizations, although they look too much like the bratty-faced Hildebrandt Hobbits, and Sam in particular looks dreadful. On the up side, the then-little-known John Hert has a good, dark presence as Strider, and Gandalf really looks like Gandalf. Anthony Daniels as Legolas seems almost lost in the shuffle, however, and most of the characters seem wooden and forgettable. Peter Woodthrope as Gollum is pretty good, but he comes off second-best when compared with Brother Theodore's performance for Rankin & Bass--and third best next to Andy Serkis if the NLC live-action version. Galadriel'is quit well done, and her scenes with the Hobbits much closer to the original story than in the NLC film. But Eowyn is anything but appealing, and Rohan looks like a dirt-bag.
This is one of those movies that the more you see of it, the worse it seems to get. The characters are hard to identify with, the tone is ponderous rather than exciting, and it does little to inspire newcomers to rush out and buy the books for themselves. And worst of all-- it ends on a series of cliff-hangers made all the more infuriating because the "second half" of the story was never finished!
It cannot be truly said that this final film picks up where the Bakshi fiasco left off because it completely ignores the unfinished portions of "The Two Towers" and goes straight into the final book of the trilogy.
While infinetly more watchable than the Bakshi film, this one does not, alas, measure up to the Promise of "THE HOBBIT". Apart from the Hobbits, most of the characters are just as wooden as Bakshi's, and sometimes even more so. Aragorn is a token figure who looks good and does nothing memorable (and where, Oh where was Arwen at his coronation?). Gandalf seems impotent, and Galadriel is written right out of the story. Eomer is missing, yet Faramir has a brief appearance with no explanation of who he is. The only characters apart from the Hobbits to fare reasonably well are Denethor and Eowyn and at least Theoden looks the part. But even among the Hobbits, Merry and Pippin are mere comic relief, with no character developement whatsoever. None, at least, that is appealing.
The film's virtues rest entirely on Frodo, Sam and Gollum--and arguably, this is perhaps how it should be in this case. But Orson Bean, so delightful as Bilbo in the earlier film, is a less than satisfying voice for Frodo. The show, therefore, belongs to Roddy McDowell's wonderful portrayal of Sam Gamgee and once again, Brother Theodore's spine-chilling Gollum. I continue to be non-plussed by the Orc scenes, which are played as comic relief to break up the unrelenting grimness of the march across Mordor. These scenes provide real irritation--and almost perversely, real amusement (Their song, "Where There's a Whip, There's a Way" is one of the highlights of the film -- a fact more frightening than an Orc having a pleasant walk in the garden -- and that actually happens, too!).
It is not a disastrous film, but it is not a very good film. It is often an uneven, unsatisfying and even silly film. Let's face it -- this is just not a cute, kiddie-friendly story, and no amount of effort can make it so. That's what they were trying to do, I think. After all, this was for TV.
And I still don't understand why the cover of the DVD shows Sam and Frodo astride a white horse, with two dwarves beside them!
We were almost the first people in line this morning for the 12:30 am showing -- the first showing in town, I might add. We did not leave the theater again until around 4:15pm. It was a full day's event.
So what was this movie like, this most awaited of movies, where One Ring -- and two wizards, five Hobbits, two humans, a half-dozen notable Elves and one Dwarf -- would bring us all and in the darkness bind us? Well, to start with, it has been a very long time since I have seen such a long line and such a packed theater for a mid-week morning movie of any kind, including Sar Wars. It was going to be a tough audience to impress, though, this collection of middle-aged baby boomers and the new generation of young Tolkien lovers, all who knew these characters like old friends, and who knew their stories as well as they know our most beloved fairy tales.
To begin with, the empasis of this version of Lord of the Rings is on action and suspense. I suppose this is natural, considering that its director, Peter Jackson, has directed such films throughout his career. And to get the "negatives" out of the way first, some of the early sections of the story move at such a rapid pace that sometimes it felt a little too rushed, and I sorely missed the liesurely, "Hobbity" atmosphere that characterizes FotR when it is read. Bree didn't feel as much like Bree as it does Mos Eisley's wretched hive of scum and villany, and the Hobbits are not cautious.. No local Hobbits, no dancing on the tables. Barliman Butterbur's role , so likable in the original, is almost a token appearance. Harry the Gatekeeper gets trampled by the Nazgul, and there is no explanation of where Bill the Pony came from. There were a few other little disappointments, such as Farmer Maggot's scythe appearing over the cornfields, but no farmer Maggot to be found. There is Gimli's tantalizing comment about meeting the "Elf-Witch" Galadriel ("she'll never charm this Dwarf", he grumbles). You gleefully wait to see his about-face change of heart, but it never happens onscreen. Also missing was the Gaffer. (see the DVD review below) I think that writing him out was a sad mistake because a brief appearance would have been all that was necessary, and his continued influence over Sam throughout the story provided much humor when it was needed.
Those are my principle complaints. They are not nearly as many as there could have been, and let's face it -- no Tolkien fan will ever be 100% pleased with even the best of movies. This comes pretty near to being the best we can expect. After all, even a three hour movie can hold only so much, and this film does hold plenty. In fact, it is so good that the audience sat glued and on the edge of their seats from start to finish, and was quite forgiving of the various ommissions and capsulations.
I promptly fell in love with the Shire and its adorable inhabitants, and it was very easy to see why Gandalf loved them so much. Bag End was a delightful place to live, surprisingly big despite the scaled-down proportions. As a matter of fact, one of the great features of the movie was the evocative depiction of such other famous places as Isengarde, Weathertop, Barad-Dur, Mount Doom, Moria, Lothlorien and Rivendell ("Nice little place ya got here, Mr.Elrond...") and the sweeping landscapes of Middle Earth. We are even treated to an early glimpse of Minas Tirith, weary, crumbling, her economy teetering from centuries of fighting a fruitless stalemate with Mordor, hovering on their horizon with threatening evil. All of it was framed magnificently with the dark, melancholy, and gorgeous music score of composer Howard Shore, which was perfection itself. To this day, I wonder why so many people got up to leave while the beautiful "May it Be" was sung over the closing credits.
The highlights were many. Wonderful use is made of flashbacks and dramatizations of events which are only talked about at the lengthy Council of Elrond, and therefore they come spectacularly, often chillingly to life. Elrond emerges from the shadows as a major player. We always knew he was, but for once it is shown boldly to us and therefore he becomes all the more real, all the more powerful. We are shown the full power of the Ring in battle, and we feel that this is only a warm-up to what My Precious could do if it really got going.
I was charmed, as I've said before, by the Shire, and Bilbo's big party was wonderful fun. Gandalf's fireworks were truly spectacular, and his rapport with the squealing Hobbit children is just enchanting. There were some neat surprises -- Merry and Pippin turning into the Bad Boys of Hobbiton, getting into the best fireworks like mischievous children. As a matter of fact, Merry and Pippin are perpetually shown as the Bad Boys, instigating the pilfering of Farmer Maggot's vegetables, lighting fires on Weathertop to cook supper, heedless of the anger they might attract, stirring up orcs in Moria, which unfortunately turns them in to "Rosencrantz & Guildenstern" of too many old jokes, reinforcing the false impression that no one can tell them apart.
But if I was charmed by the Hobbitry, I was awed by the etherial Shangri-La of Lothorien and Rivendell. (The elves remind me strongly of Vulcans, not only in looks, but demeanor.) And if any one scene stands out in this movie, it is the nightmarish journey through Moria, with its final escape scene about as intense and emotional as can be imagined. Orcs came down like a swarm of hideous arachnids, only to be frightened away themselves by the Balrog (anything that could scare off that army of orcs had to be something REALLY mean!). The chase through yawning caverns, and over precarious bridges and stairways that seem to have been designed by a demented Dr. Suess, is nail-biting danger that has you gripping your seat. The grieving for Gandalf was so intensely felt on screen that you could feel it rippling throughout the audience, which is not something witnessed every day. And minutes later, came the final scenes with Boromir, climaxing in his aborted rescue attempt and subsequent death. There was not a dry eye in the theater -- myself included. And I don't cry at movies!
I have to mention the Black Riders at this point. These fellows are scary -- dark, billowing, shadowy things like dry, black leaves, they wait for Frodo to put on the Ring and slip into their own dimension plane in a series of chilling moments that are nothing short of electrifying. Even bugs and worms flee from these creatures!
I was impressed with the characters: not just the actors, but the interpretations of Tolkien's characters. All five of the major Hobbits were superb. Despite my fears, based on the publicity stills, the Hobbits did not seem at all oversized, and it was impossible not to like them. Ian Holm simply was Bilbo, and much could be said for the others. Elijah Wood made a winsome, engaging Frodo, and Sean Astin a great Sam who will no doubt do justice to the Hobbit he is destined to become. Personally, I was greatly amused with Billy Boyd as Pippin. Here was a Hobbit who observed that the people in Bree actually got served a whole pint of ale, so he had to go order one of those for himself, at the risk of loosening his own tongue. He thinks primarily about his stomach in the midst of a dangerous journey, wondering how many meals he is going to get. He doesn't just drop a rock into a bottomless well in Moria -- he knocks down a whole skeleton in armour, attached to a bucket, causing the most stupendous echo imaginable. ("Fool of a Took!") I was somewhat less happy with Merry Brandybuck, but not due to any fault of Dominique Monaghan, who was actually quite charming. I think it is because Merry was always the cautious one, the planner, the leader; and we see comparatively little of that in this production--apart from plotting to steal fireworks and knowing the best way acros the Brandywine River. Presumably he will come into his own in "The Two Towers".
Legolas, played by pretty-faced Orlando Bloom, and Gimli (a barely recognizable John Rhys-Davies) come across extremely well though one could have wished for a little more of their infamous bickerings. "You'll not toss a Dwarf!" Gimli snarls in Moria as Aragorn tosses little Hobbits across a widening chasm, only to have Legolas seize him by the beard in a rare moment of comic relief, where he shouts "Not by the beard !!". I confess I can't wait until "Two Towers" to see this pair in hot competition with each other when they fight orcs and uruks at Helm's Deep.
Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) and Boromir (Sean Bean of "Sharpe's Rifles" fame) were perfect as the two token humans of the story. Despite the insistance of the author that LOTR is no allegory (Tolkien believed it would be sacreligous), these two men made you believe what myself and many others recognized long ago, that it is in fact a very allegorical story. Aragorn, a symbolic figure of Christ, as will be seen later, even looks a little bit like Jesus . Sean Bean's performance is nothing less than perfect, and it was the first time I ever found myself really able to like Boromir, a man brave and strong, who was genuinely fond of the Hobbits, and all-too-human under terrible pressures -- but who redeems himself in the end and gains forgiveness and peace.
My only serious quibble with Aragorn is Jackson's notion that the ranger is a king in exile mostly because he fears to take the throne and be tested by the Ring. All readers of the books will have surely recalled that the Kings of Gondor were only waiting until the Ring was rediscovered before they would send forth a claimant to the throne. This element was completely altered in the movie.
Sir Ian McKellan was an incredible and awesome Gandalf, just as Christopher Lee was chillingly perfect as Saruman. One could believe that these two wizards both wielded tremendous power, and you could feel Gandalf's love for the Hobbits just as surely as you felt Saruman's coldness as his long contacts with the Dark Tower (through the Palantir) twisted his judgement and reason until he had become little better than the Dark Lord himself. There is a cautionary tale to be told here, and it isn't over yet. Sir Ian made you believe he was really Gandalf, that greatest of all literary wizards, including Merlin. His Oscar nomination was well earned.
A word should be said about the ladies of this story -- notably Arwen Evenstar (Liv Tyler) and Queen Galadriel (Oscar-winning Cate Blanchette). I had strong misgivings about both of these women before I saw the movie, but no more. The only padding to Arwen's part (--to the disappointment of her fans who saw her pumped-up publicity and expected to see her in a major role--) was in giving Glorfindel's short scene to her at the Ford, which is rather the way Ralph Bakshi gave the same part to Legolas in 1978. It was a harmless alteration which makes Tolkien fans feeling greatly relieved, but leaves some Liv Tyler fans feeling they've been baited and switched. They need not fear. I have a gutt feeling that she will accompany Aragorn along the Paths of the Dead, at the very least, as her brothers did in the original novel. Galadriel was truly a queenly figure, beautful and perilous as Aragorn had said -- and as Boromir feared. The scene between her and Frodo at the Mirror is a breathtaking, though I did have one reservation: Galadriel, in the book, behaved more like the Galadriel in the Bakshi animated film, which for once was a preferable interpretation.
But what of the real star of the film? Gandalf? Frodo? Sam? Believe it or not, Top Billing in the credits actually went to Precious himself -- the One Ring. No, I am not joking. The "Voice of the Ring", played by the nephew of the late, great Leslie Howard, is the central figure in this three hour extravaganza. And the Ring IS a character in its own right. It glows, shrinks, swells, whispers, betrays, tempts, cheats, deceives, and all but laughs at the arguing Elves and Dwarves in the normally peaceful house of Elrond, as if delighting in having stirred up old hatreds. While others argue, it chorltes the "One ring to rule them all..." intonation in the Black Speech of Mordor. Whenever it is on the screen, it dominates everything, like a bad actor determined to upstage the rest of the cast. Its evil is felt to the core of its little golden heart, and it is easy to see it as the embodiment of sin and evil itself. Even Sauron, the demonic Lord of the Rings himself, is weakened without the Ring. On his hand, it scatters armies like dead leaves and creates devastation beyond imaging. On the hand of others, it is curiously even more deadly -- because that is the nature of sin, and it must be destroyed even if it means someone must sacrifice himself to do it. And here is the very heart of the Christian message which permeates this epic story. This movie does not skirt the fact, and indeed it seems to revel in it.
In conclusion, this is a movie that, while it may not always capture the whimsey, the poetry, the tiny details of Tolkien's masterpiece, certainly captures Tolkien's power and beauty. It is a truly great film, magnificent and deeply moving, and well deserving of the praise it has received.
These movie reviews are the opinions of Daisy Brambletoes,
and may not be quite the same as your own.
They are only suggested guidelines, and not meant to be taken as
Official Pronouncements from the Shire Office of the Mayor.
Well, it comes in a box made to look like a book. If you spend twice as much, you can get it in a "collector's box" with Pillars of Argonath bookends and an extra disk of the National Geographic special on LOTR. The point being made is, was it worth the months of waiting from the orginal VHS/DVD release in August? My answer would have to be an unequivocal...YES!
From the opening scenes, you feel you are really seeing this movie again as if for the first time. In fact, some of the scenes were so crucial to character developement and to storyline information that I was hard put to understand why most of them were not in the original release at all, except to keep within a time limit. Of course, the original release was not so much aimed at the old fans as it was in trying to win new fans, and at over three hours', it was probably feared that the audiences might get bored and restless with a three-hour-plus aventure. And perhaps the Powers-That-Be were right. We spent about four hours on this new, extended production: great in one's living room, perhaps not so great in a theater. Be that as it may, both the original version and the extended have much to offer either way, and I enjoy them both.
The new version restores not only valuable scenes that should never have been cut, but also restores the much more liesurely, deliberate pace of Tolkien's books. Much time is now spent introducing audiences to Hobbits, and to Bilbo Baggins. The Shire scenes are priceless,and worth the price of the DVD in themselves. Likewise, the restoration of Lothlorien and the scenes that take place there are every bit as wonderful, and some of the funniest new moments in the film take place in both Lorien and the Shire. It is just astounding to think that once upon a time they were not there at all. If there is any negative side, I might only suggest that the battle with the Troll seems just a little bit to long, but that is only my opinion.
Without going into too much detail and spoiling it for those who have not seen the new film, I will close by reminding you that this glorious epic is a "must" to see before we all go down to the theater on or about December 18 to catch the next installment of "Lord of the Rings". I recommend, then, if you do not already own a DVD player -- this set alone will make it worth the purchase of one!
Winner of Two Academy Awards
All original text and artwork by"Daisy Brambletoes" are the property of Cheryl W. Duval and Off-Note productions and is not to be used without written permission. Movie stills are property of New Line Cinema.
Like the first volume of DVD's, this one also comes in a box made to look like a book. If you spend twice as much, you can get it in a "collector's box" with a statue of "Smeagol" and the offer to purchase a matching "Gollum", like bookends. You also get a book on the making of Gollum, and a rather worthwhile DVD on the same subject. Like the first set of discs, this one is worth every penny you'll pay, and it is much the same as watching the movie fresh, for the first time.
The highlight of these editions are the added and expanded scenes which should have been in the theatrical release, but due to clever marketing strategy, were held back until now. I won't belabor them, except to say that I was most taken with the delightful scenes in Fangrn Forest, complete with an inclusion of the long-lamented Old Man Willow from the original FOTR, and treebeard taking the place of the much-missed Tom Bombadil. It works, maybe better than it does in the Old Forest. And thought no names are given to the huorns, we are introduced to thm quite spectacularly. My favorite moment was the one with Merry and Pippin searching Saruman's larder to find tons of food and two kegs of South Farthing pipeweed.
There are other fine moments -- the funeral of Prince Theodred, being one. I have always had a fondness for the Riders of Rohan, and they seem even better here. The clipped and hurried look that othered me about the theatrical version has been nicely smoothed over, and there is a far more Tolkienesque flavor to the film than before.
One of the truly great moments is the flashback scene when Faramir thinks of his brother. It is a wobnderful and telling scene, dropping dire hints of the disfunctional nature of Lord Denethor's family -- the true nature of the old man's sinister demands on his sons vaguely hinted at, but soon to be revealed. (don't worry--i won't tell if you don't know the story).
This is a stunning and dramatic achievement all around.
For the previous two years, I was able to walk effortlessly into the movie theater on Day One of the first two episodes of "Lord of the Rings". This year was an exception, as seats were sold out everywhere. And so I had to wait one extra day to get in, listening to the official rave reviews all over TV and the Internet. My expectations, of course, were very high -- this being the most exciting, powerful section of the whole adventure; the one most drenched in symbolism, Christian and otherwise. So I was expecting near perfection.
The opening sequence with the two little redneck Hobbits, Smeagol and Deagol, was perfectly executed, and a masterful explanation of who and what Gollum really was, and Gollum is a principle figure in this film. It is also a chilling reminder of the evil power of the ring that these two Hobbits, wholly unaware of what they had in their hands, was something that would literally cause them to fight to the death. The rest of the movie was big, it was beautiful, it was stirring. I spent three hours and 20 minutes completely engrossed, just as I knew I would be. The telling of this epic story was exciting and moving. But was it perfection?
I may fall into a very small minority here, folks, but I could not help feeling on some level a bit let down. As usual, very important scenes were missing, and as usual, we can only hope that some sort of restoration will appear next year when the extended DVD is released. But beyond that, there were so many loose ends that I felt quite uncomfortable. Perhaps I am a fuddy-duddy old Tolkienite who can still recall my first few readings of the final volume, and so much that I felt was important was apparently not important enough to Peter Jackson.
I'll start off with the negatives and get them out of the way.
It has been much discussed that Saruman and Wormtongue would either meet a messy demise on the ruins of Isengarde, or else they would not be seen at all. The latter proved to be the case, and rumor has it that the scenes already shot will be restored on the DVD. I would hope so. Otherwise, there is no closeure at all to the story of these two villains, and the uninformed would always have a doubt as to their ultimate fate.
There were other nagging loose ends, too. No explanation of how Faramir and Eoywn came to be so affectionate together at Aragorn's coronation, no mention whatever of the recovering of Sam's pony, Bill-- and a curious implication that the three Elven rings were not actually held by Elrond, Galadriel and Gandalf, but instead by Elrond, Galadriel and Celeborn. Aragorn arrives on the shores of Minas Tirith, but his royal banner is not unfurled nor does he heal the wounded with athelas, the plant that only the King could heal with. The Shire isn't invaded by Saruman and his "ruffians" (most likely the surviving Uruks), but the Hobbits are blissfully unaware of everthing -- something Tolkien would have been displeased about since he saw this part of the story as highly important. I think it is also a great pity that they did not show how and why Sam took the Ring, and what he did with it while he had it. On that note alone, surprisingly, the old animated film by Rankin & Bass seized on what this film missed.
On a very personal level, I was disappointed because the harrowing adventures of Frodo and Sam seemed severly shortened to me. The Christlike imagery was there, but not as well defined as it had been in the books, made all the more impressive when he forgives the spiteful, impotent Saruman at the door of Bag End, only to have his mercy rejected. A powerful Christian statement about the unsaved world as a whole, and the nature of evil. And even more greatly missed was the very obvious comparison of Aragorn as Christ the Returning King -- Elessar, High King of all the kings of Middle Earth, who could survey his mighty kindgom with a glance of the seeing stones, who had been looked for for many centuries, his coming forgotten by all but a few, The king of kings who ruled over all, as Tolkien said in an extensive paraphrase of the Book of Revelation, and who comes to fight evil with an army of the risen dead who have sworn allegience to him, and claims his own and his bride (The body of Christian believers is referred to in the Bible as the Bride of Christ). This personally bothered me tremendously, because it removed much of the power that has long been keenly felt in the reading of the original, even in the days before I was a Christian. In fact, it was this book that first helped me to understand Christianity.
Yet I cannot say that the allegorical imagery was completey lost. Aragorn at the gates of Mordor was very Apocolyptic, and the simultaneous events of the Lion of Judah/King of Kings at the Gate of mordor/Hell with the Lamb of God at the top of a mountain, taking the Ring for himself (as in, taking on all the sins of the word) was a powerful statement whether as a secular adventure epic, or as a statement of Christian symbolism. And it was an electrifying moment.
The film will certainly have to be considered a great success, and many moments were gloriously portrayed. Apart from what I mentioned above (and it was, keep in mind, a personal quibble) the journey of Frodo and Sam was mostly well done. It just could have shown so much more. Gollum cleverly sets about to create a rift between Frodo and Sam, and almost succeeds in doing so. This alteration was for dramatic affect, of course, and it does work in this context. It was probably necessary to show Gollum more villanous and Sam more sympathetic, because you may remember that, in the book, it was Sam who pushed Gollum over the brink at the end of "Two Towers" with his angry words and gestures of mistrust. Yet the sequence comes off well enough, and Sam moves into the realm of the truly heroic as he was meant to.
I liked the scene where Pippin tries to please bitter Lord Denethor by offering his service while Gandalf tries to shut him up. That was funny, and more pleasing than what might have been a stuffy moment (I always found it stuffy in the book). A similar scene was filmed showing Merry swearing allegience to King Theoden, but it does not appear in this release. Some of the film's most electrifying moments are reserved for the battle scenes, of course. The moment when Faramir leads his doomed regiment into battle with Pippin singing a plaintif chant with words from a Shire song, is a powerful moment, and made my hair stand on end! The lighting of the beacons was breathtaking to see, just as the crossing of the Paths of the Dead was creepy and magnificent. As Tolkien said, no one could stand before the army of the Dead. The Battle of Pelannor Fields will have to stand as one of the great battle scenes in Hollywood history, and imrpoves every time you see it. Wow! One of my personal favorite moments was watching Legolas scrambling over the mountainous oliphant, counting heads out loud as he shoots Southrons, only to have Gimil snap back "That still only counts as one!" over the enormous body of the fallen mamukil. That was a great moment.
I was also impressed with the Shelob sequence. No one has ever attempted to film this scene before, and it was actually scarier and more gruesome than the book itself, if that can be imagined, if perhaps not as emotion-stirring in the end when Sam believes is master is dead.
The demise of Denethor was spectacular, and Denethor never was a terribly sympathetic character. However, there was absolutely no mention of the fact that he himself kept a hidden Palantir n his tower, and this was what enabled him to see the events closing in on him, and an explantion of how he had been corrupted. It gives even heavier weight to the tragedy of his unwitting son, Boromir. There was also no question that haad he lived, he would have refused to give up his rule without a fight, and more blood would have been spilled. The whole city of Minas Tirith seemed sterile and decayed under Denethor's rule, even given the fact that the city was under three thousand years of on-and-off warfare. It was just as Tolkien described it, with its coldness, its crumbling infastructure, and its uninviting grandeur. It is a pity that we are not allowed to see it as the great city King Elessar restores.
Despite the fact that the scourging of the Shire was removed, the closing sequences of the hobbits' return to the Shire was extremely effective. No, life will never be the same, and as readers of the books know, it never is. Only Sam is able to readjust to the world he'd once left behind, to carry on for the future. We are never told the ultimate fates of merry and Pippin in this film, but in the book they eventually return to Minas Tirith in their later years, to be knights of Gondor and to end their days buried among the Kings of Old.
One of my favorite moments is the final parting shot of Frodo, as he prepares to leave. His face is beautiful, angelic, and unforgettable -- as some loved one who leaves us forever should be rememberd. For Peter Jackson's clear implication is that Frodo and Bilbo have died and "crossed the sea", as was anticipated from the moment Gandalf described Death to Pippin, using Tolkien's own words of the closing pages of the book, speaking the very words that Tolkien used when Frodo's ship passes from mortal view. And the closing moments, with Sam and his family, and the beautiful, uplifting song, is a moment to remember.
So it isn't a perfect film! I still loved it all the same, and will see it again. And again. And when the extended DVD comes out, hopefully correcting the correctible omissions, I will be there for it yet again.
