The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
We got lucky when we rolled our random numbers and came up with a great one to kick off our cinema adventure: LotR: Fellowship of the Ring.
This movie came in at #19, according to IMDB. Initially, this placement seemed about right.
Throughout the movie, it struck me that the acting is fantastic. The ensemble fits well, and the hobbits (Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, Billy Boyd and Dominic Monaghan) are all believable. They truly look like a couple junior high kids ready to get in trouble at all times. Legolas the Elf (Orlando Bloom) and Gimli the Dwarf (John Rhys-Davies) act as true foils, even in the short amount of time they get to develop their characters in the first movie. Boromir (Sean Bean) gets short-changed by the script. Due to a lack of time before his death, Boromir comes across as largely a jerk. If you’ve read the books, you know he is merely a man (a great one at that) who worries about the fate of Gondor, his stewardship, after many long years of battling Mordor without assistance. The movie tries to show this at the end, but it’s too late. Boromir comes off as whiny and it feels like he only saves Merry and Pippin out of a feeling of guilt instead of a sense of duty and friendship. Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) shows the second most dramatic change throughout the movie after Frodo. Throughout Fellowship, Mortensen demonstrates to the viewer all facets of Aragorn, the Ranger and the King of Men. Gandalf (Ian McKellan) maintains an air of mystery and calm, showing glimpses of fear or at least urgency. He flows between these two states seamlessly. He doesn’t seem to have mood swings, so much as an innate ability to only panic when necessary.
The script lacks in certain places, and there are parts that don’t stay true to the book. However frustrating Arwen rescuing Frodo may be (Glorfindel was pretty awesome.), the script is still outstanding. The dialogue feels genuine and has a depth that allows the viewer to appreciate the relationship that Frodo and Sam share.
The cinematography and directing were impeccable, although Peter Jackson — to my mind — is still overrated. The special effects were good, especially the makeup for characters such as Lurtz. The surprising lack of CG is refreshing, considering that the movie’s sequels overuse the technology to the point that enemies become faceless.
Lastly, there is the soundtrack. How could anyone not give the soundtrack a 10? Howard Shore does an amazing job. The music is noticeable when it should be, and hides in the background, creating a mood, when the situation calls for it as well.
If you haven’t seen this movie, see it. The only part of you that might regret that choice is your bottom because it will be sore after being glued to your seat for such a long period of time.
| Author | Script | Acting | Cinematography | Soundtrack | Directing | Special Effects | Overall |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ben | 9 | 9 | 10 | 10 | 8 | 9 | 9.167 |
| Marc | 8 | 7 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 9 | 8.833 |
| Jon | 8 | 8 | 8 | 10 | 6 | 8 | 8.0 |
Benjamin J. Friedman
Jonathon Medlock
Marc Willis
couchtheater 
I always enjoyed this movie as a teen, but I tend to believe that a sense of nostalgia and a sort of feeling like “I read all 360+ pages of this book as a kid, the movie has to be good” clouds my critical judgment. I honestly haven’t seen it in a few years, and should probably bust it out and focus on setting the film apart from the series, apart from my prejudice and watch it with a purely “neutral” viewpoint.
I’ve found that this is a refreshing experience, and one that all of us have enjoyed. It’s hard to set the book apart from the movie, but when you do, it makes sense that Arwen rescues Frodo. Why introduce an absurdly powerful character, explain that Elrond is even more powerful, and then justify not having a Fellowship that consists of Gandalf, Elrond, Glorfindel, Aragorn, Galadriel, Gimli, and Frodo?
I have a feeling that any Star Wars movies on the list (are all 3 on, or was it just 2?) are going to have this issue. Have to figure that you’ve been seeing those movies since being a child, and especially compared to the prequel films being generally poorly viewed, that it’s going to be hard to watch without expectinig it to be good ahead of time.
This is why I liked your review of Harvey, I would have loved to see that one, it might make my “to watch” list.
I feel like our opinions on Star Wars are so well cemented that they won’t change. I mean, looking at them critically, we may notice a few things that we didn’t before, but we’re all nerdy enough that Star Wars is near and dear to us. I don’t think the sequels will affect our view of them too much as none of us seemed to hate them nearly so much as the rest of humanity. I could probably tell you what I will give Star Wars in each category before watching it, but I hope I can glean something different from it this time around, as I have every other time I’ve watched it.
I would definitely recommend Harvey for anyone’s Watch List.
“I could probably tell you what I will give Star Wars in each category before watching it” This is exactly what I was meaning. It’s kind of a bummer that certain movies can’t be viewed the same way simply because you’re so familiar with them.
Yea, but I’m going to try to be open-minded about it. We’ll see. The good news is that it will be an objective analysis.