*SOME SPOILERS HERE, CAREFUL PLEASE*
Sublime and mindblowing were the two words that reverberated in my head after stumbling out of the theater at 1 am. Two days later, I've decided to try to make sense of the trilogy and think a little instead of simply raving (which of course I was doing the entire night after the movie).
I still feel that The Fellowship of the Ring remains truer to Tolkien's series of books, simply due to the fact that as the flagship for the Lord of the Rings trilogy, director Peter Jackson was required to meticulously and beautifully paint a portrait of Middle Earth and establish the character of various peoples. The realms of Hobbiton and Rivendell receive wonderful treatment and illustrate the distinctive qualities of the inhabitants of the two places.
While The Fellowship of the Ring functions as an exploration of Middle Earth, The Two Towers begins the actual conflict of Middle Earth, the Great War between good and evil. It expanded the tale of a small group of people (primarily the Fellowship) into the epic story of an entire world. As the scope of The Lord of the Rings increases during this middle chapter, Peter Jackson's ability to concentrate specifically on its protagonist's struggle naturally diminishes to a degree, as he now must also tell the story of the rest of Middle Earth. Tolkien's heroes are sucked into a whirlpool of battle and conquest, their original goal of the destruction of the One Ring swept aside for the moment as external conflict blocks their paths. The original quest of Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas, their search for the hobbits, transforms into the greater goal of saving the land of Rohan. Far from their role in the first film of companions to Frodo, Merry and Pippin find their purpose in convincing the Ents to siege Isengard Tower in order to aid their friends. Even Frodo and Sam's much more direct goal of reaching Morder is diverted when Faramir drags them to the battle of Osgiliath.
Cinematically The Return of the King finds itself with more stunning material, wonderfully crafted and tailored to Jackson's particular sensibilities. It strikes a balance between the epic and the dramatic, taking some of each of the first two films. Because Frodo and Sam have escaped the War into Mordor at this point, Jackson is able to focus tightly on their journey now and the impending dangers and doom that await them. The presence and mastery of his earlier horror work expresses itself very strongly here, both in the rapid camerawork and cutting and the art direction. Specifically the Stair to Cirith Ungol and the den of Shelob reflect the director's love of frightening and creepy atmosphere and the monsters that lurk in the back of our minds. Aragorn's quest to enlist the Dead army of the mountain are very visually reminiscent of Jackson's Dead Alive (the trail through the mountains seems to be the same canyon that he used in the opening sequence of Dead Alive as well).
While battle still runs rampant in The Return of the King, it yields to specific and more personal moments in the War. Eowyn's battle with the Witch King and Denethor's growing insanity punctuate a vast and somewhat static epic battle, bringing the story back to its heroes rather than expanding it to the whole of Middle Earth. Return of the King seems to take the reverse strategy of The Two Towers, sidetracking the War with the personal quests of the film's protagonists. It seems that director Peter Jackson tires of dealing with the material on a large scale (for the point is made that many have sacrificed and lost in this war after several minutes of carnage), most apparently when Aragorn's Dead Army ravages the hordes of Mordor in a split second, neatly cleaning up the rest of the battle to allow the film to progress to its smaller-scope climax on Mount Doom. Ultimately it is the characters that represent the races of Middle Earth that interest us (primarily the Fellowship of the first film), not the actual masses of people themselves, as Aragorn clearly enunciates with his cry of "For Frodo" as he charges the ranks of Mordor.
The Rosebud enigma in Citizen Kane allows Orson Welles to explore the deeper puzzle of the identity of Charles Foster Kane. In the same right, the story of the destruction of the One Ring, while compelling and wonderful in its own right, is a device that allows Tolkien's characters (and thus the film's audience) to traverse the whole of Middle Earth and sample its wonders. The Ring becomes a concrete metaphor for evil in general and the struggle of the small hobbits is a specific manifestation of the theme of the weak struggling against great adversity.
While the films' detractors criticize Jackson's inability to remain true to the original books, I believe that he has more than adequately illustrated the world of Middle Earth. Subtleties that are readily available in the printed medium may be impossible to transpose onto the silver screen. The three films carefully balance an energetic storyline with lush, imaginative and breathtaking visuals that represent the world of Tolkien to the audience. Imagery and visual splendor have always been the strength of the cinematic medium more than anything else and it will be the beautiful images that Peter Jackson created in the Lord of the Rings trilogy that remain with us for years to come.
Sublime and mindblowing were the two words that reverberated in my head after stumbling out of the theater at 1 am. Two days later, I've decided to try to make sense of the trilogy and think a little instead of simply raving (which of course I was doing the entire night after the movie).
I still feel that The Fellowship of the Ring remains truer to Tolkien's series of books, simply due to the fact that as the flagship for the Lord of the Rings trilogy, director Peter Jackson was required to meticulously and beautifully paint a portrait of Middle Earth and establish the character of various peoples. The realms of Hobbiton and Rivendell receive wonderful treatment and illustrate the distinctive qualities of the inhabitants of the two places.
While The Fellowship of the Ring functions as an exploration of Middle Earth, The Two Towers begins the actual conflict of Middle Earth, the Great War between good and evil. It expanded the tale of a small group of people (primarily the Fellowship) into the epic story of an entire world. As the scope of The Lord of the Rings increases during this middle chapter, Peter Jackson's ability to concentrate specifically on its protagonist's struggle naturally diminishes to a degree, as he now must also tell the story of the rest of Middle Earth. Tolkien's heroes are sucked into a whirlpool of battle and conquest, their original goal of the destruction of the One Ring swept aside for the moment as external conflict blocks their paths. The original quest of Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas, their search for the hobbits, transforms into the greater goal of saving the land of Rohan. Far from their role in the first film of companions to Frodo, Merry and Pippin find their purpose in convincing the Ents to siege Isengard Tower in order to aid their friends. Even Frodo and Sam's much more direct goal of reaching Morder is diverted when Faramir drags them to the battle of Osgiliath.
Cinematically The Return of the King finds itself with more stunning material, wonderfully crafted and tailored to Jackson's particular sensibilities. It strikes a balance between the epic and the dramatic, taking some of each of the first two films. Because Frodo and Sam have escaped the War into Mordor at this point, Jackson is able to focus tightly on their journey now and the impending dangers and doom that await them. The presence and mastery of his earlier horror work expresses itself very strongly here, both in the rapid camerawork and cutting and the art direction. Specifically the Stair to Cirith Ungol and the den of Shelob reflect the director's love of frightening and creepy atmosphere and the monsters that lurk in the back of our minds. Aragorn's quest to enlist the Dead army of the mountain are very visually reminiscent of Jackson's Dead Alive (the trail through the mountains seems to be the same canyon that he used in the opening sequence of Dead Alive as well).
While battle still runs rampant in The Return of the King, it yields to specific and more personal moments in the War. Eowyn's battle with the Witch King and Denethor's growing insanity punctuate a vast and somewhat static epic battle, bringing the story back to its heroes rather than expanding it to the whole of Middle Earth. Return of the King seems to take the reverse strategy of The Two Towers, sidetracking the War with the personal quests of the film's protagonists. It seems that director Peter Jackson tires of dealing with the material on a large scale (for the point is made that many have sacrificed and lost in this war after several minutes of carnage), most apparently when Aragorn's Dead Army ravages the hordes of Mordor in a split second, neatly cleaning up the rest of the battle to allow the film to progress to its smaller-scope climax on Mount Doom. Ultimately it is the characters that represent the races of Middle Earth that interest us (primarily the Fellowship of the first film), not the actual masses of people themselves, as Aragorn clearly enunciates with his cry of "For Frodo" as he charges the ranks of Mordor.
The Rosebud enigma in Citizen Kane allows Orson Welles to explore the deeper puzzle of the identity of Charles Foster Kane. In the same right, the story of the destruction of the One Ring, while compelling and wonderful in its own right, is a device that allows Tolkien's characters (and thus the film's audience) to traverse the whole of Middle Earth and sample its wonders. The Ring becomes a concrete metaphor for evil in general and the struggle of the small hobbits is a specific manifestation of the theme of the weak struggling against great adversity.
While the films' detractors criticize Jackson's inability to remain true to the original books, I believe that he has more than adequately illustrated the world of Middle Earth. Subtleties that are readily available in the printed medium may be impossible to transpose onto the silver screen. The three films carefully balance an energetic storyline with lush, imaginative and breathtaking visuals that represent the world of Tolkien to the audience. Imagery and visual splendor have always been the strength of the cinematic medium more than anything else and it will be the beautiful images that Peter Jackson created in the Lord of the Rings trilogy that remain with us for years to come.