The Lord of the Rings

[TM2YC]

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
Despite it's titanic scale, the siege of Minas Tirith is somehow a lower stakes battle than Helm's Deep. It's won too easily and we are never given any extra Gondorian characters to give a damn about in the siege, like how Theoden, Eowyn and Eomer gave us a way into the new land of Rohan in the last movie. Faramir is great but he's largely absent from the city, or out of action and Denethor is (rightly) not somebody we are rooting for. We've got Gandalf and Merry to fall back on but it's mostly a mass of generic men in silver armour. Maybe if they'd kept Prince Imrahil in the script and/or added a crusty old Tower Guard Captain to take Pippin under his wing and wax lyrical about the city he loves (and of course sadly die in defense of his home), it could've helped this aspect. Much of the runtime is spent building up the seemingly insurmountable threat from the vast Orc army and then they are swept away in a few minutes by the charges of the Rohirrim and the ghost forces, without anybody in Minas Tirith needing to lift a finger. Frodo and Sam seem to get from Cirith Ungol to Mount Doom very quickly and a little too easily.

None of those narrative quibbles really matter though because 'The Return of the King' is such a thrilling, emotional and spectacular adventure. The lighting of the beacons, across sweeping shots of mountains backed by Howard Shore's heroic music is a majestic sequence. The speech by Theoden before the horse charge is so well done. The inter-cutting of Pippin's lament, Denethor's gluttony and Faramir's sacrifice is visual poetry. Legolas taking down the Oliphaunt single-handily is a classic (surely inspired by the AT-AT battle in Star Wars). All the scenes with Frodo and Sam are so beautiful played by the two actors. The Sharkey ending is wisely removed, I never liked it, The Shire should remain this unchanging blissfully ignorant idyll, for our changed Hobbit heroes to return to. On the subject of endings, I was surprised that people raised the length of it (a 45-minute coda) because I was familiar with the book (it was drastically shortened, if anything). With no knowledge of how this story concludes, I can see why people would find it tiresome because Jackson keeps fading to black/white, adding bits of voiceover featuring the word "ending" and many long pauses featuring swells of music. What a staggering achievement these films are, never to be repeated. Even the same team reuniting for The Hobbit couldn't quite recapture that magic.

 

[Moe_Syzlak]

I plan to spend 11.5 hours in middle earth this weekend and spend the rest of the time writing excessively long reviews of the films...

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
Back in 2001, I was a bit too wedded to Ralph Bakshi's 1978 animated movie and the 1981 BBC radio series (also starring Ian Holm) which I had grown up with to fully appreciate Peter Jackson's film. After years of re-watching I now can't imagine how I ever thought this was anything other than a practically perfect translation of the first volume of Tolkien's novel. The Extended Edition clocks in at 3.5 hours but slips by so easily. The trims and changes to the source are almost always assiduous and smart. e.g. Bakshi wisely changed Glorfindel to Legolas to get the character in early but Jackson takes that change one further and changes him to Arwen, giving her a key scene that instantly establishes her as a hero. There are some beautiful film-making moments like when Boromir picks up the ring from the snow and we only cut to Aragorn's hands on his blade after the tension has dissipated, or the spectacular crane shot sweeping down through the woods of Amon Hen as the Fellowship battle the orcs. Howard Shore's score is so beautiful, his themes sing out strongly from each other. Is there anybody who couldn't hum the Shire theme right now?

It could be that this represents a pinnacle of film-making, never to be repeated. Where at least 90% of this massive fantasy movie is accomplished with practical FX but made at a point where CGI was just getting good enough to make the other 10% possible. The old techniques going back to the silent era, like forced perspective, miniatures and makeup are blended with the latest FX techniques. So 19-years later, just about every shot still holds up, where as the more recent mostly CG Hobbit trilogy didn't even hold up when it was first released. To my mind, the vast helicopter shots of the real actors running along the tops of real New Zealand mountains backed by Shore's soaring music, is far more "epic" than any shot stuffed with 100 CGI creatures, explosions and battles. This deservedly won the Oscar for Makeup and Hairstyling. It's like Jackson decreed "I don't want to see a single hair in place, a single inch of skin that isn't splattered in mud and sweat, or a patch of clothing that isn't worn and frayed". It's the unsung hero of the project, there is literal "dirt under the fingernails" of this otherwise outlandish world, which also makes the pristine ethereal Elf characters stand out even more. The ensemble is almost faultless but Ian McKellen, Viggo Mortensen and Sean Astin are my highlights. If there is such a thing as a "Van Dyke Scale" ranking Americans doing British accents and Dick Van Dyke's chimney sweep is at the bottom, then Sean Astin's note perfect West-Country accent might be at the top.

If I was looking for faults, I never quite liked the awkward way Gandalf's death was handled, him not being pulled down into the chasm but weirdly letting go just so he can deliver his last line down the barrel of the camera. It's much better done in Bakshi's film, with Gandalf's last words echoing from the depths. The removal of Barliman Butterbur (the innkeeper at Bree) as a significant character was a mistake. Not only because he's a charming character in his own right but because we see the low opinion in which Strider is held through his eyes and then get to chuckle when we see how astonished Barliman is to learn who Aragorn really was in 'The Return of the King'.

By the way, since the grade on the official blu-ray of FotR looks truly horrible, I watched 44rh1n's fan re-grade, which brings it in line with the Theatrical Cut visuals. Great work that fellow!

Here is Richard Roeper back in the day ranting about how terrible it is to an incredulous Roger Ebert :

To be fair, Ebert also says Harry Potter is a better movie. Lol.

I didn’t read any of the books (nor the Hobbit) before seeing this. I wasn’t into D&D or any dragons, wizards, and knights fantasy stuff. I brought my 15 year old baby brother to see it because I thought for his generation it would be like Star Wars was for mine. He hated it. As we were leaving he said, “it was just walking and talking for three hours.” But I loved it. So I find it hilarious to hear Ebert imply only fans of the books will go see it and enjoy it. Obviously both of them were wrong. Fellowship is still my favorite of the three.

 

[ChainsawAsh]

Did you do the EE or TC of ROTK? That's the only one of the three where I prefer the theatrical.

 

[TM2YC]

To be fair, Ebert also says Harry Potter is a better movie. Lol.

 I watched their reviews of the other 2 films, from the two subsequent years, Roeper does some major back peddling . Ebert doesn't seem to have been keen on the dark tone and focus on action, which is a fair enough criticism (not one I subscribe to). There must have been fans out there who were gutted that the very silly Tom Bombadil sequence got cut... although I've never met one .

Did you do the EE or TC of ROTK? That's the only one of the three where I prefer the theatrical.

EE. If I'm reading movie-censorship right the TC omits Saruman, the drinking game, crown of flowers, Aragorn using the Palantir, mouth of Sauron etc. I'd really miss those bits.

I forgot to mention one more criticism of the Jackson adaptations... They choose to cut out Legolas and Gimli's pact. Where they agree to go on a "holiday" together if they survive, exploring the caves beneath Helm's Deep and the forests of Lothlórien. It would've only taken a couple of minutes at most.

 

[Gaith]

EE. If I'm reading movie-censorship right the TC omits Saruman, the drinking game, crown of flowers, Aragorn using the Palantir, mouth of Sauron etc. I'd really miss those bits.

The trouble with the Saruman death scene is the good guys just win too damn much. In TTT, the Ents destroy Isengard, and the heroes hold Helm's Deep. In RotK, Gondor calls for aid and Rohan answers, Aragorn gets his ghost army, Minas Tirith is saved, Sauron and Mordor are destroyed, and not a single good main character perishes after Boromir in the first movie. When you take all that baked-in winning and then add Saruman getting killed at the start of the third film, how is the audience supposed to believe in the villains' threat? The only thing the heroes lose in the second and third parts is an outpost that's already ruined. Jeez!

 

[Masirimso17]

EE. If I'm reading movie-censorship right the TC omits Saruman, the drinking game, crown of flowers, Aragorn using the Palantir, mouth of Sauron etc. I'd really miss those bits.

The trouble with the Saruman death scene is the good guys just win too damn much. In TTT, the Ents destroy Isengard, and the heroes hold Helm's Deep. In RotK, Gondor calls for aid and Rohan answers, Aragorn gets his ghost army, Minas Tirith is saved, Sauron and Mordor are destroyed, and not a single good main character perishes after Boromir in the first movie. When you take all that baked-in winning and then add Saruman getting killed at the start of the third film, how is the audience supposed to believe in the villains' threat? The only thing the heroes lose in the second and third parts is an outpost that's already ruined. Jeez!

But what about Theoden?

 

[TM2YC]

EE. If I'm reading movie-censorship right the TC omits Saruman, the drinking game, crown of flowers, Aragorn using the Palantir, mouth of Sauron etc. I'd really miss those bits.

The trouble with the Saruman death scene is the good guys just win too damn much. In TTT, the Ents destroy Isengard, and the heroes hold Helm's Deep. In RotK, Gondor calls for aid and Rohan answers, Aragorn gets his ghost army, Minas Tirith is saved, Sauron and Mordor are destroyed, and not a single good main character perishes after Boromir in the first movie. When you take all that baked-in winning and then add Saruman getting killed at the start of the third film, how is the audience supposed to believe in the villains' threat? The only thing the heroes lose in the second and third parts is an outpost that's already ruined. Jeez!

But what about Theoden?

...and don't forget that really important Elf character from the first two movies that died at Helm's Deep. Everybody remembers his name. I know I do but I'm not telling .

 

[Masirimso17]

EE. If I'm reading movie-censorship right the TC omits Saruman, the drinking game, crown of flowers, Aragorn using the Palantir, mouth of Sauron etc. I'd really miss those bits.

The trouble with the Saruman death scene is the good guys just win too damn much. In TTT, the Ents destroy Isengard, and the heroes hold Helm's Deep. In RotK, Gondor calls for aid and Rohan answers, Aragorn gets his ghost army, Minas Tirith is saved, Sauron and Mordor are destroyed, and not a single good main character perishes after Boromir in the first movie. When you take all that baked-in winning and then add Saruman getting killed at the start of the third film, how is the audience supposed to believe in the villains' threat? The only thing the heroes lose in the second and third parts is an outpost that's already ruined. Jeez!

But what about Theoden?

...and don't forget that really important Elf character from the first two movies that died at Helm's Deep. Everybody remembers his name. I know I do but I'm not telling .

...Dobby?

 

[TM2YC]

I've just realised I've been coincidentally watching RotK at around the same time of year as the events happen. Sam and Frodo were making their way towards Mount Doom and the "good guy" army had reached the borders of Mordor while I watched and they'll cast the ring into the fire this Wednesday (March 25th) . Neat.

 

[Gaith]

Ahem:
 

not a single good main character perishes after Boromir in the first movie.

 

But what about Theoden?

Secondary character.

 

...and don't forget that really important Elf character from the first two movies that died at Helm's Deep.

Tertiary character/glorified extra.

 

[Moe_Syzlak]

I’m watching Fellowship right now. I rented it from Apple because my EE DVDs are in storage while we’re in Germany. Man, the color grading really is horrible. But this is really the best of the three. There’s still a few too many fake out deaths and perhaps those help to undermine the subsequent movies.

 

[TM2YC]

Ahem:
 

not a single good main character perishes after Boromir in the first movie.

 

But what about Theoden?

Secondary character.

I get where you are coming from, like one of our OG heroes but Theoden has waaaay more screen time than Boromir. There are probably 30 characters that have more screen time than him. I was browsing through a few of those "first time reaction to..." youtube videos on LotR and Theoden's death delivered the tears on queue, at least as much as Boromir's.

Which reminds me of the time when I first saw FotR in the cinema when it came out. Boromir's beautiful death scene happens, he's doing his speech, pledging his allegiance to Aragorn, the audience are all dabbing their tears away, he dies, Aragorn leans in for a noble kiss on the brow of his fallen comrade and a teenager in audience yells out "Gay!" :dodgy: . Thank heavens we seem to have collectively grown up since them.

 

[Gaith]

^ Okay, but also... I don't want to be insensitive towards old folks or anything, but Theoden's old. And he's already lost his only son. And he's got at least some bad karma for having been bewtiched by Wormtongue, even if it was a literal bewitching in the movies rather than the devious persuasion of the books. So, for him to redeem himself, ride into battle, and die a heroic death, in the context of a war deciding the fate of the world, and with Karl Urban ready and worthy to take charge of his people, isn't a setback for the good guys - at most, it's an asterisk. It certainly doesn't raise the dramatic stakes.

Heck, even Boromir's death, while definitely unfortunate and sad, is itself partly "earned," dramatically speaking, by his attempt to take the Ring. I'm not saying PJ should have made a change and killed Merry or Pippin or Leggy or Gimli in RotK order to raise the stakes, but in the context of all this, to open the third movie with Saruman dying after being made irrelevant by the Ents is just too much.

(... Actually, now that I think on it, maybe either Merry or Pippin should have died. Hell, even ancient-ass Bilbo survives the saga!)

 

[Jrzag42]

Who the heck is Theoden

 

[addiesin]

Who the heck is Theoden

Bill Cosby's son on tv.

 

[Gaith]

Who the heck is Theoden

Google is your friend. C'mon, man.

(Also, he's the captain of the Titanic.)

 

[Jrzag42]

Looked it up, I barely remember this character.

 

[Moe_Syzlak]

Who the heck is Theoden

He’s the character whose beard many people used in the early 2000s to calibrate their TVs.

 

[Moe_Syzlak]

Inspired by @"TM2YC" , I just finished TTT. I’m watching the theatrical cuts on Apple TV because my EE DVDs are in storage while we’re in Germany. I haven’t watched the theatrical versions in a very long time. And I’m struck by how little I miss from the EEs. But there’s definitely some parts that feel very weak. Faramir is completely underdeveloped for example. It got me to thinking if anyone has done a (Not So) Extended Edition of these movies. To be honest I’ve never wanted for one before. I’ve always been happy with the Extended Editions. But movies closer to the theatrical cut in length but making perhaps different choices could be interesting.

 

[Gaith]

^ How much development does Faramir really need, though? In the book, he's so pure and incorruptible he says that if he saw the Ring on the ground while out walking, he wouldn't even pick it up. I think all but the most hard-core of book purists would say that would be a bad, tension-wrecking characterization to carry into the movie, but he seems pretty straightforward to me: a younger brother of Boromir, mourning his far more badass sibling and terrified for his kingdom, whose men apprehend Frodo and Sam, and he's tempted to take the Ring. Works just fine for moi without an extended flashback sequence, featuring Sean Bean.