The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
Director: Peter Jackson
Writers: Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, and Peter Jackson. Based upon the novel by J.R.R. Tolkien.
Cast: Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, Sean Bean, Cate Blanchett, Orlando Bloom, Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan, Ian Holm, Christopher Lee, Ian McKellen, Viggo Mortensen, John Rhys-Davies, Harry Sinclair, Liv Tyler, Hugo Weaving
Note: It's been a long time since I've seen the theatrical cuts of any of The Lord of the Rings films. Therefore, this review technically only applies to the Extended Edition.
Overview
Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring represented the first live action motion picture of Tolkien's fantasy epic to be brought to the big screen. It was a rousing success that has not been equaled or surpassed since.
Synopsis
When lost ring of Sauron, created for the purpose of dominating Middle Earth, comes into the possession of Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), the young hobbit must flee for his life. At the start of his journey he his accompanied by three other hobbits, his gardener Samwise (Sean Astin) and the inseparable mischief makers Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd). As the danger grows, they are joined by others. When it is decided during the council of Elrond (Hugo Weaving) that the one ring must be destroyed, the Fellowship of the Ring is formed. Comprised of Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas (Orlando Bloom), Gimli (John Rhys-Davies), Gandalf (Ian McKellen), Boromir (Sean Bean) and the four hobbits, the fellowship sets off to brave the dangers of Morodor. Meanwhile, the treacherus Sarumon (Chris Lee) plots with Sauron as they prepare for an all out war to reclaim the one ring.
The Queering
Given that this film is over ten years old and how nearly every critic out there has already praised Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings and how this widely regarded one of the greatest cinematic accomplishments ever and how, along with the success of the Harry Potter films, they caused the fantasy genre to suddenly be uber-respected, yada, yada, yada, I'm just going to skip the part where I sound like a frothing at the mouth fanboy and jump right into talking about the subtexts.
To start one must wonder what exactly Tolkien thought of traditional marriage given that his ultimate symbol of evil is a gold ring that rules over and binds all of the other rings together. Of course, with the ring, that's not the only subtext possible. As I already mentioned in my review of The Hobbit: A Not So Unexpected Gambit to Force Tolkien Fans to Buy More Tickets By Overstretching the Material Into Three Films Sauron's One Ring can be compared to the development of nuclear power during World War II or to the Ring of Gyges which is discussed in Plato's Republic.
As I also mentioned in the prior review, the dwarves can be seen as representing the Jewish population, which gave me a new perspective on the Mines of Moria scenes. For it was in the mines of Moria where Gimli discovers that an entire host of his kin was destroyed by a Balrog, one of the darkest and oldest evils in Middle Earth.
Of course, I can't forget the treasure trove of queer subtexts dangling all over the place now could I? With a couple of exceptions, this is pretty much a boys only endeavor. There are relatively few female characters of note that Tolkien created in the books. The role of Arwen was beefed up for the films in order to provide a little girl power and amp up the romance between her and Aragorn. Speaking of straight romances, the only two male characters who ever express any interest in females are Aragorn and Samwise.
Now there isn't really enough room for me to document all of the male bonding that takes place, all I can really do is document the highlights. There's the relationship between Frodo and Sam (which has been discussed in depth elsewhere). In Jackson's The Fellowship of the Ring we see Sam, in spite of the fact that hobbits supposedly hate boats and water, willing to risk death and drowning rather than face separation from Frodo.
Then there is the relationship between Merry and Pippin, the unseperable comic relief duo. Frenemies Gimli and Legolas haven't gotten past their differences by the end of Fellowship, but will be best buds by the end of The Two Towers. However, the other frenemie couple Aragorn and Boromir do get a touching scene at the end of this film, during which they hold hands and swear undying allegiance to each other.
There are several scenes where other characters ask Frodo to give them the one ring or where Frodo offers it up to them (Galadriel, Aragorn, Boromir, Gandalf) and I couldn't help but think "Gee, don't these sound a lot like marriage proposals? Shouldn't he be down on one knee?" Of course, given the apparent ratio of males to females in Middle Earth, Frodo is offering the ring up most of the time to a male character (Galadriel represents a brief bi-curious phase I guess).
Recommendation
One may not simply walk into Mordor, but it certainly would be worth braving that desolate land to see this film.
The Rating
**** out of ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Showing posts with label J.R.R. Tolkien. Show all posts
Showing posts with label J.R.R. Tolkien. Show all posts
December 28, 2012
Queer Review: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
Director: Peter Jackson
Writers: Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Peter Jackson, and Guillermo del Toro. Based upon the novel The Hobbit, There And Back Again by J.R.R. Tolkien.
Cast: Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Ken Stott, Graham McTavish, William Kircher, James Nesbitt, Stephen Hunter, Dean O'Gorman, Aidan Turner, John Callen, Peter Hambleton, Jed Brophy, Mark Hadlow, Adam Brown, Ian Holm, Elijah Wood, Hugo Weaving, Cate Blanchett, Christopher Lee, Andy Serkis, Sylvester McCoy, Manu Bennett
Overview
In spite of being too long and overly padded, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey manages to offer up a few small pleasures (in addition to a couple of interesting subtexts).
Synopsis
Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman) an ordinary hobbit is roped into joining a dwarven expedition to reclaim a lost city by the mischievous wizard, Gandalf (Ian McKellen). The dwarves, lead by Prince Thorin (Richard Armitage), are without a homeland to call their own, but in order to slay the dragon that now occupies the city of Erebor, they will need Bilbo's help to find a secret entrance into the cave. After the journey is started, Bilbo meets a strange creature, Gollum (Andy Serkis) and acquires a strange ring from with mysterious properties.
The Queering
Tolkien is not a writer who ever made it his goal to say what he needed to with as few words as possible. One of the huge advantages The Lord of the Rings movie trilogy had over the books was how they condensed Tolkiens work without losing too many of the details and nuance of Middle Earth. Unfortunately, with An Unexpected Journey Peter Jackson seems dedicated to mimicing Tolkien by drawing out every unnecessary detail possible. There's also a couple of battles with orcs that I do not recall from the book, although it has been almost two decades since I read it.
I'll grant that some of the additional material is interesting, such as how it's suggested here that Saruman has already gone over to the dark side and Radagast discovering the Necromancer (who I'm guessing is supposed to be Sauron), but I'm really not convinced that there is enough material to support three films. The Hobbit is light fantasy story about slaying a dragon and lacks the epic structure that helped build The Lord of the Rings into one of the greatest film series in recent memory.
With the additional material, The Hobbit could have been built up into two films, both of which could have received the Extended Edition treatment. In fact, there's plenty of material here that I think would have worked better in that context. Scenes such as those with Bilbo Baggins interacting with Frodo or the scene with Gandalf and Galadriel where Gandalf explains why he choose Bilbo for the expedition would have been fine for an extended cut. In the theatrical edition, they feel self indulgent and only served to remind me of how quickly movie theater seats can turn into torture devices.
There is also the issue of that feeling of "been there, done that, got the t-shirt that says I Survived the Mines of Moria". I kept finding myself in a perpetual state of, "Haven't I seen this set/locale/character/prop/shot/battle/fight/scene before?" Howard Shore seems to have been paid just so he could cannibalize his score from Lord of the Rings. I actually enjoyed the superfluous material that came with the inclusion of Radagast the Wizard, simply because he was a completely new character. However that does not change the fact that this issue would have been alleviated if some of the redundant material could have been relegated to an extended edition.
As for queer subtexts, there are almost none. This is rather unlike the Lord of the Rings where they were all over the place, (Frodo and Sam, Gimli and Legolas, Merry and Pippin). However, it did seem to me that two of the dwarves, Kili and Fili, were based upon Merry and Pippin and that they shared a similar bond. Also unlike the Lord of the Rings movies, there are no beefed up straight romances. I will say though that Richard Armitage seems to have been cast in order to provide a little dwarven eye candy. In fact, the dwarves are presented as more human in appearance here than one typically finds on film.
There are also a few other subtexts I want to comment on. Here, the dwarves quest to reclaim Erebor reminded me of the Jewish attempts to secure their own state. Not only that but the dwarves appearance, with their unshaven beards and braided sides reflect that of Hasidic Jews. A certain stereotype of Jews is also reflected in the Dwarves pursuit of riches and wealth through mining. This subtext becomes more interesting when one considers the ways Lord of the Rings mimics World War II, with the ring Bilbo discovers reflecting the development of nuclear power.
Speaking of the ring, it has it's own subtext as well in the way it seems to have been inspired by the Ring of Gyges. The Ring of Gyges was a mythical ring that turned it's wearer invisible, thereby granting them unlimited power. Socrates argued in The Republic that if such a ring were to exist, anyone who wore it would be corrupted by the unlimited power that would be granted. In a way, Tolkien and the filmmakers appear to refuting Socrates by arguing that human empathy can over come our petty quests to dominate one another. Indeed, the scene where Bilbo decides to spare Gollum's life is among the most compelling out if all the movies, especially when one considers the ultimate consequences of that decision.
Recommendation
In spite of the pacing issues, I do still recommend this, but with qualifications. It's simply that this not so unexpected journey is just not as great as it could be.
The Rating
*** out of ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Peter Jackson
Writers: Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Peter Jackson, and Guillermo del Toro. Based upon the novel The Hobbit, There And Back Again by J.R.R. Tolkien.
Cast: Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Ken Stott, Graham McTavish, William Kircher, James Nesbitt, Stephen Hunter, Dean O'Gorman, Aidan Turner, John Callen, Peter Hambleton, Jed Brophy, Mark Hadlow, Adam Brown, Ian Holm, Elijah Wood, Hugo Weaving, Cate Blanchett, Christopher Lee, Andy Serkis, Sylvester McCoy, Manu Bennett
Overview
In spite of being too long and overly padded, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey manages to offer up a few small pleasures (in addition to a couple of interesting subtexts).
Synopsis
Bilbo Baggins (Martin Freeman) an ordinary hobbit is roped into joining a dwarven expedition to reclaim a lost city by the mischievous wizard, Gandalf (Ian McKellen). The dwarves, lead by Prince Thorin (Richard Armitage), are without a homeland to call their own, but in order to slay the dragon that now occupies the city of Erebor, they will need Bilbo's help to find a secret entrance into the cave. After the journey is started, Bilbo meets a strange creature, Gollum (Andy Serkis) and acquires a strange ring from with mysterious properties.
The Queering
Tolkien is not a writer who ever made it his goal to say what he needed to with as few words as possible. One of the huge advantages The Lord of the Rings movie trilogy had over the books was how they condensed Tolkiens work without losing too many of the details and nuance of Middle Earth. Unfortunately, with An Unexpected Journey Peter Jackson seems dedicated to mimicing Tolkien by drawing out every unnecessary detail possible. There's also a couple of battles with orcs that I do not recall from the book, although it has been almost two decades since I read it.
I'll grant that some of the additional material is interesting, such as how it's suggested here that Saruman has already gone over to the dark side and Radagast discovering the Necromancer (who I'm guessing is supposed to be Sauron), but I'm really not convinced that there is enough material to support three films. The Hobbit is light fantasy story about slaying a dragon and lacks the epic structure that helped build The Lord of the Rings into one of the greatest film series in recent memory.
With the additional material, The Hobbit could have been built up into two films, both of which could have received the Extended Edition treatment. In fact, there's plenty of material here that I think would have worked better in that context. Scenes such as those with Bilbo Baggins interacting with Frodo or the scene with Gandalf and Galadriel where Gandalf explains why he choose Bilbo for the expedition would have been fine for an extended cut. In the theatrical edition, they feel self indulgent and only served to remind me of how quickly movie theater seats can turn into torture devices.
There is also the issue of that feeling of "been there, done that, got the t-shirt that says I Survived the Mines of Moria". I kept finding myself in a perpetual state of, "Haven't I seen this set/locale/character/prop/shot/battle/fight/scene before?" Howard Shore seems to have been paid just so he could cannibalize his score from Lord of the Rings. I actually enjoyed the superfluous material that came with the inclusion of Radagast the Wizard, simply because he was a completely new character. However that does not change the fact that this issue would have been alleviated if some of the redundant material could have been relegated to an extended edition.
As for queer subtexts, there are almost none. This is rather unlike the Lord of the Rings where they were all over the place, (Frodo and Sam, Gimli and Legolas, Merry and Pippin). However, it did seem to me that two of the dwarves, Kili and Fili, were based upon Merry and Pippin and that they shared a similar bond. Also unlike the Lord of the Rings movies, there are no beefed up straight romances. I will say though that Richard Armitage seems to have been cast in order to provide a little dwarven eye candy. In fact, the dwarves are presented as more human in appearance here than one typically finds on film.
There are also a few other subtexts I want to comment on. Here, the dwarves quest to reclaim Erebor reminded me of the Jewish attempts to secure their own state. Not only that but the dwarves appearance, with their unshaven beards and braided sides reflect that of Hasidic Jews. A certain stereotype of Jews is also reflected in the Dwarves pursuit of riches and wealth through mining. This subtext becomes more interesting when one considers the ways Lord of the Rings mimics World War II, with the ring Bilbo discovers reflecting the development of nuclear power.
Speaking of the ring, it has it's own subtext as well in the way it seems to have been inspired by the Ring of Gyges. The Ring of Gyges was a mythical ring that turned it's wearer invisible, thereby granting them unlimited power. Socrates argued in The Republic that if such a ring were to exist, anyone who wore it would be corrupted by the unlimited power that would be granted. In a way, Tolkien and the filmmakers appear to refuting Socrates by arguing that human empathy can over come our petty quests to dominate one another. Indeed, the scene where Bilbo decides to spare Gollum's life is among the most compelling out if all the movies, especially when one considers the ultimate consequences of that decision.
Recommendation
In spite of the pacing issues, I do still recommend this, but with qualifications. It's simply that this not so unexpected journey is just not as great as it could be.
The Rating
*** out of ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)