(May contain spoilers, written for those who have seen the film or whom that don't bother with it).
I'm agree: LOTR (The fellowship of the ring) isn't the best picture of all times. Only our love to Tolkien's world can explain this massive Nº 1 votation, not an exhaustive and expert critic...but a question remains: Could be LOTR (the complete trilogy) one of the most important and significative film in cinema history? I say: YES.
I read LOTR on 1981 and from this moment to present, I have to recognize that Tolkien's vision lives on me. When on January 2001, I read that one film director decided - against all hopes - to transcribe on cinema that marvelous masterpiece, I thought: Wonderful, but ...How???
I don't like to see trailers, no teasers, no making offs, no reviews... nothing before to see any film. It's an obsession, in despite of all the advertising campaigns, always, I try to get a movie what claims my attention, in the way of an one-to-one relation without any interpellation... as a birth. Wait 11 months was a hard test.
One thing it's a book and another a film: both are done from different substances. I never expected from Mr. Jackson's version a faithfully transcription of the Tolkien's world... that's impossible. I must to confess that minutes before the screening, I was near a collapse of anxiety... I love LOTR, didn't want to be disappointed. Intimately, each one desired (I asked to my friends who read the book to confirm it) that Aragorn, Frodo, Gandalf... would take form.
Now exists a film and everything can change... in better, I believe. Mr. Jackson and et al have done a well job: they took risky decisions at every step and they've got it well. It was definitive the participation of John Howe and Alan Lee (Tolkien's books illustrators): their particular vision of the Middle Earth's landscapes, the character genotypes, their ways of clothing, every detail susceptible of be captured by cameras was so hardly considered. We are talking about a great enterprise, never done before: three films on one shooting schedule... it's scaring, if you have any doubt ask one producer.
The film structure is amazing but at same time, classic. It's important remember that this is 1/3 part, so we must to wait a little more to bring a whole opinion. The prologue who drives no familiar audiences, is strong and evocative, an adequate perspective to the tone of the mythic story. Besides we observe the Gandalf's arrival to Hobbiton: Jackson wants that everyone enjoy this nice town full of life, color and humor. And here, proposes his style: every stage will have its mood. A Tolkien mood as genuine as possible in the film zone: visual narrative in despite of narrative description. It was clear that the filmmaker must to cut many of the plenty situations created by Tolkien - I always thought that Tom Bombadil and the Barrow - Wight should be cut in a film version. By this way, Jackson introduces a narrative mode what diverges from Tolkien style: the parallel montage, describing the Saruman - Gandalf confrontation at the same time that Strider joins to the four hobbits.
Then he introduces Arwen, the elve princess, instead of Glorfindel... what's is the problem? It's a movie: for a director is important show as quickly as possible the characters who offers conflict, dynamics tension, proximity... so occurs with Aragorn and Arwen. And more extensively, between Boromir and Aragorn. Jackson resolves well that dilemma without sacrifice the plot essence: `the ring must be destroyed' and this is possible because there are a fellowship of races what believes in life, love, honor, freedom and friendship.
Jackson never forget the power of the Tolkien's words: some of the more dramatic scenes were constructed over the path of the dialogue net fixed by the creative mind of Tolkien.
Then the fellowship begins the travel toward its destiny: Caradhras, Moria (the fall of Gandalf is superb and get an emotive moment)... during these sequences we reach the performance of the principal cast: Elijah Wood (Frodo) scared and reflexive; Sean Astin (Sam) with his unconditional loyalty and courage; Dominic Monaghan and Billy Boyd (Merry and Pippin), funniest and when it's required: braves; John Rhys-Davies - is really him???, great!- (Gimli), grumpy as a dwarf and strong as a rock, Orlando Bloom (Legolas) moving as a cat, his face, imperturbable, Sean Bean (Boromir) warrior, prouder... a real man of Gondor, Viggo Mortensen (Aragorn) lonely, risky, majestic, Liv Tyler (Arwen) pretty and with an elve grace, and Sir Ian McKellen (Gandalf)... his performance is simply perfect, not is only the dressing way or the make up job: is the voice, the smile... the glance. I encountered so beautiful Galadriel's presence since Frodo listens hers voice in mind... Cate Blanchett gets a convincing elve queen: lovely and terrible, wise and friendly, young and old. We can't forget Christopher Lee (Saruman) and the magic of Sir Ian Holm as Bilbo Baggins. It's comprehensible that the whole performance depends of the others films (`The two towers' and `The return of the king').
Painfully today, in our world of poor images, after miles and miles of celluloid feet it is a hard task to produce genuine emotion, but the problem not fall on films but on our lack of perception, we have lost the ability of astonishment: we don't listen well, don't see well... we are so dazzled by nothingness. One reason could be that we don't read more. By this way, I'll be so happy if more people go to read, quickly, LOTR, even if later they'll say (surely): `It's better than the film'.
Peter Jackson has put an incredible challenge, from this point of view, it's recommend no discuss the no ending way: there are no preconceived formulas. When finally we can watch LOTR completely, probably we'll say: `Well, Lord Jackson, thou hast passed the test'.
Namárië!
I'm agree: LOTR (The fellowship of the ring) isn't the best picture of all times. Only our love to Tolkien's world can explain this massive Nº 1 votation, not an exhaustive and expert critic...but a question remains: Could be LOTR (the complete trilogy) one of the most important and significative film in cinema history? I say: YES.
I read LOTR on 1981 and from this moment to present, I have to recognize that Tolkien's vision lives on me. When on January 2001, I read that one film director decided - against all hopes - to transcribe on cinema that marvelous masterpiece, I thought: Wonderful, but ...How???
I don't like to see trailers, no teasers, no making offs, no reviews... nothing before to see any film. It's an obsession, in despite of all the advertising campaigns, always, I try to get a movie what claims my attention, in the way of an one-to-one relation without any interpellation... as a birth. Wait 11 months was a hard test.
One thing it's a book and another a film: both are done from different substances. I never expected from Mr. Jackson's version a faithfully transcription of the Tolkien's world... that's impossible. I must to confess that minutes before the screening, I was near a collapse of anxiety... I love LOTR, didn't want to be disappointed. Intimately, each one desired (I asked to my friends who read the book to confirm it) that Aragorn, Frodo, Gandalf... would take form.
Now exists a film and everything can change... in better, I believe. Mr. Jackson and et al have done a well job: they took risky decisions at every step and they've got it well. It was definitive the participation of John Howe and Alan Lee (Tolkien's books illustrators): their particular vision of the Middle Earth's landscapes, the character genotypes, their ways of clothing, every detail susceptible of be captured by cameras was so hardly considered. We are talking about a great enterprise, never done before: three films on one shooting schedule... it's scaring, if you have any doubt ask one producer.
The film structure is amazing but at same time, classic. It's important remember that this is 1/3 part, so we must to wait a little more to bring a whole opinion. The prologue who drives no familiar audiences, is strong and evocative, an adequate perspective to the tone of the mythic story. Besides we observe the Gandalf's arrival to Hobbiton: Jackson wants that everyone enjoy this nice town full of life, color and humor. And here, proposes his style: every stage will have its mood. A Tolkien mood as genuine as possible in the film zone: visual narrative in despite of narrative description. It was clear that the filmmaker must to cut many of the plenty situations created by Tolkien - I always thought that Tom Bombadil and the Barrow - Wight should be cut in a film version. By this way, Jackson introduces a narrative mode what diverges from Tolkien style: the parallel montage, describing the Saruman - Gandalf confrontation at the same time that Strider joins to the four hobbits.
Then he introduces Arwen, the elve princess, instead of Glorfindel... what's is the problem? It's a movie: for a director is important show as quickly as possible the characters who offers conflict, dynamics tension, proximity... so occurs with Aragorn and Arwen. And more extensively, between Boromir and Aragorn. Jackson resolves well that dilemma without sacrifice the plot essence: `the ring must be destroyed' and this is possible because there are a fellowship of races what believes in life, love, honor, freedom and friendship.
Jackson never forget the power of the Tolkien's words: some of the more dramatic scenes were constructed over the path of the dialogue net fixed by the creative mind of Tolkien.
Then the fellowship begins the travel toward its destiny: Caradhras, Moria (the fall of Gandalf is superb and get an emotive moment)... during these sequences we reach the performance of the principal cast: Elijah Wood (Frodo) scared and reflexive; Sean Astin (Sam) with his unconditional loyalty and courage; Dominic Monaghan and Billy Boyd (Merry and Pippin), funniest and when it's required: braves; John Rhys-Davies - is really him???, great!- (Gimli), grumpy as a dwarf and strong as a rock, Orlando Bloom (Legolas) moving as a cat, his face, imperturbable, Sean Bean (Boromir) warrior, prouder... a real man of Gondor, Viggo Mortensen (Aragorn) lonely, risky, majestic, Liv Tyler (Arwen) pretty and with an elve grace, and Sir Ian McKellen (Gandalf)... his performance is simply perfect, not is only the dressing way or the make up job: is the voice, the smile... the glance. I encountered so beautiful Galadriel's presence since Frodo listens hers voice in mind... Cate Blanchett gets a convincing elve queen: lovely and terrible, wise and friendly, young and old. We can't forget Christopher Lee (Saruman) and the magic of Sir Ian Holm as Bilbo Baggins. It's comprehensible that the whole performance depends of the others films (`The two towers' and `The return of the king').
Painfully today, in our world of poor images, after miles and miles of celluloid feet it is a hard task to produce genuine emotion, but the problem not fall on films but on our lack of perception, we have lost the ability of astonishment: we don't listen well, don't see well... we are so dazzled by nothingness. One reason could be that we don't read more. By this way, I'll be so happy if more people go to read, quickly, LOTR, even if later they'll say (surely): `It's better than the film'.
Peter Jackson has put an incredible challenge, from this point of view, it's recommend no discuss the no ending way: there are no preconceived formulas. When finally we can watch LOTR completely, probably we'll say: `Well, Lord Jackson, thou hast passed the test'.
Namárië!
Tell Your Friends