Nona from ‘The Compleat Sean Bean’ sends us these scans from an article she wrote for ‘Lifestyle Magazine’ in NZ.
Category: Old Special Reports
Friday night here in Toronto, I had the privilege of watching Peter Jackson’s “The Fellowship of the Ring.” Alliance Atlantis, the film’s distributor in Canada, kindly invited me to the press preview screening. Given the enormous challenge Peter Jackson and his team faced, we should commend them for a wonderful piece of film-making.
To convey the vast and mythic scope of Tolkien’s masterpiece in a three-hour film would have made most directors (and studios) recoil in dread. Yet Jackson and the other talented individuals have set out to present the greatness of “The Lord of the Rings”. The film is magnificent visually. For instance, the opening draws on the history of the One Ring from various parts of the book and, with grandeur, dramatizes the essential information and establishes the serious epic tone. Throughout the entire film, we see key aspects of Tolkien’s “sub-creation,” his invented history and world. There are the necessary points, such as the wretched background of Gollum, and the more obscure, such as the origin of the different races of orcs.
The flim also portrays effectively the idyllic pastoral life of the hobbits. Jackson seems equally at home in the deep, dark dungoens of Isengard or in the light, lovely land of Lothlorien. (If the film doesn’t win the awards for art direction and cinematography, a fix must be in.) There is a vivid blend of actual landscape, animation, and computer generated graphics. Readers will always have their own unique visions of the Middle-earth realms. Jackson and his great crew of artists, artisans, and crafts people created a spectacle that does reflect the essence of Tolkien’s masterpiece.
Another strong feature is the sound. The score never seems to dominate the action or dialogue, but rather nicely augments the scenes. When the music is silent, the breathing, grunts, and clash of weapons heighten the tension. The ballads by Enya sound lovely. Many of us in the cinema stayed throughout the closing credits mainly to enjoy the music.
The acting, overall, was polished and genuine. Elijah Wood’s Frodo appeared vulnerable and frightened, while still displaying inner fortitude. Sir Ian McKellen’s Gandalf was indeed majestic. Ian Holm, Christopher Lee, Viggo Mortensen, Sean Bean, and Cate Blanchett also performed well. All the actors appeared committed to their roles and endeavoured to bring out the best in them.
The pace of the film is brisk. As a Tolkien scholar, I would have preferred more reflective and poignant moments. When Gandalf convinces Bilbo to give up the Ring is in the film, and it’s very moving. Other scenes, such as those with Gandalf and Frodo, or Aragorn and the hobbits, or Gimli and Legolas are quite abbreviated, which may impinge on character development. I’m sure it was agonizingly difficult for the screenwriters to cut and condense so much of Tolkien’s great text. Perhaps some of the action sequences could have been trimmed and more time given for calm reflection. A number of key moments do appear, such as Gandalf’s words to Frodo about having pity for Gollum. The Saruman subplot receives significant screen time, with some added spectacular scenes, yet the time in Rivendell and Lothlorien was briefer than I would have wished.
Further, many Tolkien fans and scholars might object to the alterations and additions to the author’s text. They would understand that screenwriters must edit and paraphrase the book’s dialogue and scenes, especially with a work as rich and extensive as Tolkien’s. Perhaps the writers were concerned that some of Tolkien’s wordings might seem too archaic or formal to a general movie audience, one that hasn’t read the books and doesn’t know (or appreciate) the august nature of works like the Anglo-Saxon “Beowulf” or the Old Norse “Poetic Edda”.
For many Tolkien enthuasists, “The Lord of the Rings is like a sacred text: you modify it at your peril. It remains to be seen if some changed scenes, such as the attack of the Ringwraiths at the edge of Rivendell or the Gandalf and Saruman confrontation, will upset Tolkien fans. When Tolkien’s own wordings essentially remain, such as in the Gandalf and Balrog battle or in the Aragorn and Boromir scene near the end, they come across exceedingly well.
In the final analysis, anyone can find flaws and quibbles with any film, great or otherwise. Given the monumental task of bringing to the screen Tolkien’s vast epic masterpiece, New Line Cinema and Peter Jackson have done an amazing and admirable feat. The film does display the lofty and serious tone of the books of “The Lord of the Rings” and honours its subject matter. Some people may quarrel with certain scene changes and dialogue choices. Still, the look, the feel, the overall impression is Tolkienian. And for that, this Tolkien admirer is grateful.
Daniel Timmons, Ph.D.
Daniel Timmons is the producer, writer, and director of “The Legacy of _The Lord of the Rings_,” a forthcoming literary documentary. See Scripts and Scribes.com for details.
Delekhan writes: The Movie Television tv show in Toronto, on the CityTV channel, ran a special segment on LotR with interviews of various cast members and director Peter Jackson. [More] (RealPlayer Needed)
Also, I was looking around to see if we in Canada would get to see the Making Of special that set to run on the US Sci-Fi channel. Good news! I saw the following on the website for Canada’s Space Channel:
Behind The Scenes: The Lord Of The Rings
This 1 hour inside scoop on what is sure to be a HUGE Box Office hit this Christmas season will immediately follow the conclusion of SPACE’s Best of Trek Boxing Day Marathon. Wednesday, December 26 at 7pm ET, 2pm PT.
Alex writes: The most popular magazine of movies in Brazil, the “SET Cinema e V’deo” did in december a special report about Lord of The Rings containing more than 10 pages stuffed with a lot of pictures, map of Middle-Earth, a text on the life of Tolkien and a brief comment on all your books.
Not different from the rest of the world, here in Brazil we are thousands of fans awaiting the premiere of the movie.
Calendars, Journals, Magic Cubes, Oh My!!
I don’t know about you, but I’m having one heck of a good time with all this great merchandising that’s accompanying LOTR: FOTR. Cedco in particular has many outstanding offerings for the Tolkien consumer.
I’ve had my hands on a range of Cedco products that I’d like to tell you about. First off is their movie calendar, full of large, high quality images of both good and evil characters. They also offer a smaller, narrower calendar that fits neatly into a locker or small quarters. Both of these hang in my classroom 🙂
I’ve also sent the 2002 datebook and 2001/2002 student planner to friends as gifts, and of course, they love them! One must give quality mathoms to friends, no? O, I also use the student planner myself. Helps while away the faculty meetings…
Cedco also offers journals of two sizes. They feel good in the hand, and the faux leather covers of the large pair appear pretty sturdy. My favorite is a mock up Bilbo’s own Red Book, which looks like it could have been a gift from the hobbit’s library. Both large journals also feature an elastic ribbon placeholder, which does look like it may wear out over time. There are two smaller journals, one showcasing Arwen, and the other, Frodo. Both would serve as great diaries for kids, a travel journal, poetry tablet, or other uses.
If you’d like to check out these or other Cedco products, check out their website here.
I had the opportunity to view the film more than a week ago, (I’d rather not reveal where, always gotta protection the connection), and have given it a lot of thought. I thought it was very, very good. I will try to be balanced in my critique, but it is difficult not to let enthusiasm froth over, even with a couple of blemishes present.
I am not sure how many were home on Saturday night to see the “Film Stories” on TNT this evening, but it revealed some very decent footage, and we are close enough to the opening that, well, I am ready to spill some beans. It is Saturday night, I have a cold and it is miserable out, so here I sit, wondering how much I can share without spoiling it. I will address it primarily from the perspective of how it may compare with Harry Potter, not because I even believe they are worthy of compare, but because FOTR is a commercial venture – isn’t that the element that causes the most concern of compromise to all who love the books? – and given both the cost of making the movies and the recent box office take of HP, it is perhaps a logical place to begin an analysis. You see, I think the film is very, very good, and I respect enormously the devotion, energy, money, and old fashioned hard work (247 filming days!!) of Peter Jackson, the cast, and Bob Shaye and Mike Lynne at New Line Cinema. There is nothing more I want to see than that this film be a smashing success.
So what are the potential negatives that could interfere with that? Let me get them out of the way first. It is 2hrs 50min long (don’t buy the large coke), but HP was about as long, so that needn’t be an issue in itself. It is much more violent and the monsters much more threatening than HP. Whoever of you recently voted for the Balrog scene in Moria as the footage you’d most like to see, well, you are on to something there. But it is definitely sufficient to disturb the dreams of kids for whom HP was nothing intimidating. The fight scenes are very well executed, with very good sword work as well as impressive use of other weapons, but is it family fare? This would have been music to my ears prior to seeing it, but does it limit the audience?
Another element that may rub some the wrong way is that, as everyone already knows, there are certain liberties taken with the story line. Arwen has an expanded role, for example, stepping into Glorfindel’s shoes at the Ford of Rivendell. Certain dialogue is changed, but there were only a couple of times that it bothered me. Sure, in an ideal world I’d like Tom Bombadil and the Barrow Wights included. Yes, it is hard to communicate the mystery and magic of elves without all the detail and subtle innuendo of Tolkien’s narrative. But how long would you make the film?
Which brings up what may be the toughest hurdle for the film to overcome, the complexity of the plotline and the sheer number of characters. It presented no issue for me, having read the books 6 or so times, but how audiences who’ve haven’t read the book will react is tough for me to judge. For anyone reading these words on theonering.net, it is not an issue. I mention it out of my concern to see it do well.
Now, to the film’s strengths, which far outweigh any flaws. Let me tell you that this movie is a must see. It is beautiful beyond compare, its cinematography hard to believe for those not familiar with New Zealand’s geology, (and who is? … apologies to our Kiwi brethren). That country’s insane beauty combine seamlessly with the special effects of the film, to a degree that it becomes almost too much to absorb. I could not distinguish between real and effect generated, and the whole world looks so real that it threatens to inure the senses from one amazing shot to the next. With two exceptions both related to the elves, every site, every location, matched or surpassed how I’d painted them for years in my mind’s eye.
Beyond the scenery, the effects are incredible. The forces of darkness never looked so good. As I mention above, I thought they were not just incredibly realistic, but pretty darn scary. I really want to say more, but will not.
In another sense FOTR shines, particularly relative to HP, which is for kiddies, while FOTR provides much more mature treatment of a couple of themes. One is power, the temptation it presents for human nature, and the price for it that must be paid. This is a theme at the heart of the battle between light and darkness since the beginning of time … from eat of the apple and your eyes will be opened and you will be as God, to just bow down before me and all this will be yours, on to Faust and Mephistopheles, etc. … I read something recently (in the Wall Street Journal, I think) that argued that HP doesn’t address that issue except in the most superficial way, yet the subject of that movie was the goal of all alchemy, the Philosopher’s Stone. That author is right on target there.
You will see a treatment of the One Ring that seemed to me even darker than the books’, and in the makers desire to cultivate that subject you will see a fairly complete development of the lead characters and how they relate to that temptation. Gandalf is excellent, as are the different ways Boromir and Aragorn address their temptations (look for an additional and unlooked for facet in the feelings of the latter toward the Ring).
I am at loss at how much more I can say without stealing the thrill of surprise, so at risk of keeping this too short and superficial I will draw the line here. The bottom line is that the FOTR is an astounding film, unlike anything you have ever seen. Whether you have read the books or not, it must be seen. As for myself, I will be back to see it in the theatre at least twice more, and am even considering coughing up the $250 or even $500 (to be in the same room as the cast, PJ, and New Line bigwigs) at the fundraiser for the 9/11 disaster this Thursday. It seizes the imagination and does not let go.
Best to all,
Thorongil_2