The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

Ring Cycle

[Friendly warning: Spoilers are contained in this article. It is also assumed that you are familiar with the plot.]

Here's the rub: I am not a Tolkienite. I experienced The Hobbit in high school, found it mildly entertaining, and that was that. I have no emotional stake in a well-done Lord of the Rings film beyond the stake of a viewer wanting to see a good film. I am not leery about having my childhood "raped," as many Lucas followers claimed on the heels of Star Wars Episode I. But in anticipation of Peter Jackson's first chapter of the Ring saga, I read The Fellowship of the Ring for the first time.

The book is quaint, a bit patchy, occasionally spellbinding, and quite enjoyable. Despite its far-flung travels and overhanging sense of grandeur, the narrative has an intimate, almost reticent charm. It is Homer's Odyssey by way of John Ruskin, in which the telling of tales, the fastidious descriptions of landscape, and the singing of songs are just as important as the immediate unfolding quest. In its harkening back to medieval tropes and narrative styles, it is the closest the twentieth century has to an Arthurian legend.

And yet it is no surprise that it has not been adapted for the screen until now -- The Lord of the Rings in its print form is not about voluptuous visions, grand melodrama, or the kind of visceral sensory overload that characterizes modern cinema. It is about curling at a fire, listening to a tale that Bilbo Baggins himself might have conjured up, with the appropriate digressions and loving tangents, and appreciating the passage of time, the knowledge that the very act of listening to the tale is a journey of its own, and a journey to be savored rather than to be wolfed down like so much fast food. In short, much like Middle Earth, The Lord of the Rings is something from our past, something long gone but leaving a fragrant mist of memory: a vestige of that art form that was called literature.

So now Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings has arrived. Critical and fanboy reactions have been excellent, one and all. More than once it has been referred to as the best epic since Lawrence of Arabia.

Uh ...

To break it down succinctly, The Lord of the Rings is an exceptional genre film, thankfully free of the usual Hollywood pap, enlivened by excellent acting, some genuinely haunting and moving moments, and dazzling production design. Much like a hovel in the Shire, the movie is sturdy and workmanlike, and even charming at times. But Lawrence of Arabia? No.

It would be wrong to expect the cinematic retelling of Tolkien's work to stay slavishly faithful to the source; Jackson's Lord of the Rings must be taken on its own terms. But if it doesn't precisely capture the spirit of Tolkien's work, it certainly captures the visual qualities. Deft wide-angle presentations of natural vistas, dark and foreboding mine interiors, forested elf communities, and fiery mountains of doom set the scene much more efficiently than Tolkien's dexterous but long-winded descriptions. In its sheer variety of convincing settings, in its affectionate recreation of Middle Earth, the film is peerless.

So, too, are some of the actors. Ian McKellen, equal parts bluster and wizened charm, steals the show as Gandalf, and he is matched by Ian Holm as a gregarious Bilbo Baggins. Their early scenes together, in which dialogue is allowed to breathe, are as close as this film comes to channeling Tolkien. Sean Bean's twitchiness fits Boromir to a tee, and the role allows him to show off heroic qualities not seen since Mike Figgis' Stormy Monday. Viggo Mortenson cuts a striking figure as Aragorn, although he isn't allowed to do much besides slash and brood. In minor roles, Cate Blanchett (as Elf Queen Galadriel), Liv Tyler (as Elf princess Arwen), Hugo Weaving (as Elf wiseman Elrond), Orlando Bloom (as Elven archer Legolas), and an unrecognizable John Rhys-Davies (as Ghimli, the dwarf) are called on to be commanding and striking, and they fulfill these requirements in spades.

Slightly less successful is the casting of the hobbits. Elijah Wood, with his haunted bug-eyed expression and tremulous courage, fits the part, but is too often relegated to second-banana status behind the film's warriors and special effects. Despite Jackson's best efforts to dramatize his deepening moral crisis, he comes off more as a mascot than as a focal character. Sean Astin (more on him in a bit) makes for a likeable Sam Gangee, but Billy Boyd's Pippen and Dominic Monaghan's Merry are treated as afterthoughts.

Perhaps the most pleasant surprise of the film is how gripping many of Tolkien's passages become when they are transferred to the filmic medium. An extended action sequence in which the Fellowship fights off an army of orcs and a Balrog in an abandoned mine is the film's centerpiece, but all the CGI creatures in the world cannot match the hushed moment before the chaos (adapted directly from the book) wherein Gandalf intones "Drums, drums in the deep," and is answered with the far-off pounding of orc drums. The nine ringwraiths who pursue Frodo are also spectacularly realized, as they surge fearsomely on horseback, their black cloaks billowing, although Jackson would have been wise to slim down their appearances for maximum impact.

In forging a compromise between fidelity and commerce, the filmmakers have reimagined Fellowship of the Ring as a straightforward adventure story with numerous Tolkien touches, and as such it serves as a fitting parallel universe to the world of the books. It is not often that a big-budget film confronts such emotions as melancholy and loss, and it is to Jackson's credit that he captures some of the "world long lost" feel as well as the grandeur of Tolkien's creation.

Yet despite its mostly skillful avoidance of Hollywood and genre cliche, there is no doubt that Jackson's Fellowship is a product of its time. Our first indication is the early confrontation between good-guy wizard Gandalf and bad-guy wizard Saruman (played with vigor by Christopher Lee). I found myself wishing for some of the silky quasi-Shakespearean banter the two characters enjoyed in the book, rather than the half-baked wire-fu action that ensues, as well as the thunderous one-liners: "You choose the way of pain!"

Likewise, the second half of the movie depends on rote battle scenes to carry the day, as if the audience can't be trusted to sit still without extreme bloodshed for more than a hour. Despite its mammoth length, the film could have benefitted from better pacing -- more immersion in story and character development, fewer repetitive shots of our heroes being chased and menaced by endless hordes. It is as if the filmmakers are torn between staying true to the book and playing to the crowds, and it is this push-pull that informs The Fellowship of the Rings and gives it its uneasy, restless quality.

This becomes especially clear in the closing passages, in which Frodo's pal Sam pledges his friendship, and the two continue on their quest together. As those who have read the books know, this is a pivotal moment in the saga, and onscreen it is a quiet, touching scene, but scarcely any time has been devoted to laying the groundwork for it. With all the focus on dash and spectacle, Tolkien's hobbits and their central place in the story have been neglected. Time will tell whether Jackson will address this oversight in the future films, or perhaps take this Ring in different directions altogether.

But as with all good stories, we want to know at the end: What happens next? Jackson's achievement is that The Fellowship of the Ring, which may be the longest trailer in film history, accomplishes its task: it leaves us wanting more. In a movie year of bloated blockbusters, that is no small feat.

[2002 Addenum: Okay, Mr. Jackson got me. I have just watched the Special Extended Edition of the Fellowship of the Ring, and it is recommended viewing for anyone who enjoys this film. Thanks to an extended, improved introductory section, more space for character beats, and better pacing overall, The Fellowship of the Ring now has a heart and head to match its undeniable physical strength. Kudos to all involved. It's a shame, though, that the Two Towers is quite disappointing in comparison ... but I may have to wait for the Special Edition of that before I make a final judgment ...]