Post your "Fellowship of the Ring" reviews here!

[HighLordDave]

Originally posted by two:
<STRONG>Legalos was great, but mostly just because he was allowed to be Hollywood glam; everybody else was ill-shaven and had that "dirty" makeup on. Hollywood does elves well.

And was it just me, or did Gimli simply not -- work -- in the movie very well? He just rang false. Oh well.</STRONG>

The elves were done very well; all were tall, haughty and looked like, well, elves. My only problem with the elves was casting Hugo Weaving as Lord Elrond and it wasn't the movie's fault. There was one line where he said something like, "You have two choices . . ." and I was half expecting him to follow it with, "Mr. Anderss-son." That's just me type-casting him.

I think the reason why Gimli didn't have a lot of depth to him was because he (and the dwarves for that matter) didn't get much screen time. I think if we had gotten to know him better, he may not have been such as shallow character. Legolas himself didn't get a lot of face time in front of the camera, but we got a lot of introduction and mythology for the elves; no such luck with the dwarves.

One other thing which I believe speaks to the attention to detail of the movie is that everyone was a consistant height throughout the film. The hobbits and dwarves were always short. Gandalf and the other humans were human height. When Gandalf was at Bilbo's house, things were alwasy too small for the wizard and just the right size for the hobbit, even though Ian Holm and Ian McKellen aren't three feet apart in height. At no time did I feel like Frodo and Aragorn were two human actors with one playing a halfling and the other a human; they all felt genuine at all times.

[Georgi]

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn:
<STRONG>Legolas was byfar my favorite to see. He was every bit as kawaii and glompable as I expected him to be.</STRONG>

I wasn't really expecting him to be, but I was pleasantly surprised

Originally posted by Karembeu:
<STRONG>but just knowing that they have already filmed and finished "the two towers" (or whatever it's called) makes the waiting even harder....</STRONG>

If it makes you feel any better, it's not finished as such They have all the film in the can, but it's going to take them a year to do all the CGI and stuff for it.

Originally posted by HighLordDave:
<STRONG>The screenplay is especially good in that it doesn't lose the part of the audience who has not read the book. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone had this problem</STRONG>

I haven't read any HP books, and I didn't have that problem when I saw the movie.

<STRONG>The ending is a real downer.</STRONG>

I was impressed that they managed to get any kind of conclusiveness about it at all really, though they did have to put in some of what (I assume, since I haven't yet read The Two Towers) happens at the start of the next book. Then again, I was probably distracted with horror at the line "Let's hunt some orc"...

<STRONG>While the writing is generally good, there were a couple of instances where things in the "fantasy world ground rules" were not quite fully explained. For instance, what is the relationship between the elves and dwarves?</STRONG>

Agree about this - I think they were so focused on Frodo (and to a lesser extent, Aragorn and Gandalf) that the other members of the Fellowship were marginalised a bit too much. There were certain things that didn't make so much sense - for instance, they included Sam being upset at having to let Bill (the pony) go, outside Moria, but there was none of the background of Sam's affection for Bill. Also before Moria, the dialogue that Gimli had didn't quite ring true - why would Moria be such a feared place if there was a happy colony of dwarves there?

A very minor point about Gandalf, I thought it was kind of strange that in the fight with Saruman, his entire power seemed to be invested in his staff. (@Saturn I guess you probably noticed that, since we were discussing a similar thing re. Harry Potter and wands ) As soon as he lost it, he was powerless, which seems rather odd for such a powerful wizard.

<STRONG>There was one line where he said something like, "You have two choices . . ." and I was half expecting him to follow it with, "Mr. Anderss-son." That's just me type-casting him.</STRONG>

LOL That had worried me, but I didn't find myself thinking that at all. For me, all the actors really became their characters - I couldn't look at Ian McKellan and think "That's Ian McKellan", he was Gandalf, and the same goes for the rest of the cast. I thought they were great.

I will definitely be going to see the movie again

[Sailor Saturn]

Originally posted by HighLordDave:
<STRONG>The elves were done very well; all were tall, haughty and looked like, well, elves. My only problem with the elves was casting Hugo Weaving as Lord Elrond and it wasn't the movie's fault. There was one line where he said something like, "You have two choices . . ." and I was half expecting him to follow it with, "Mr. Anderss-son." That's just me type-casting him.</STRONG>

I felt the same way. He was more serious than I expected Elrond to be, though. When Sam stated he was going to go with Frodo, Elrond said something that was humorous and appeared to be attempting to smile; but it looked like his face was about to break. His expression when Merry and Pippin ran in was perfect, though.

[Sailor Saturn]

<STRONG>A very minor point about Gandalf, I thought it was kind of strange that in the fight with Saruman, his entire power seemed to be invested in his staff. (@Saturn I guess you probably noticed that, since we were discussing a similar thing re. Harry Potter and wands ) As soon as he lost it, he was powerless, which seems rather odd for such a powerful wizard.</STRONG>

Yeah, I did notice that, though I still enjoyed watching the little wizard duel(even though it could've been far more spectacular ). But did you notice that he wasn't making use of his staff when he was 'fighting' against Saruman during the storm on that mountain?

I didn't care much for the mountain scenes, not because of the way they looked but because of the content.

1.) In the book, Aragorn is the one who suggested going through the Moria, not Gimli.

2.) In the book, it was the mountain that was attacking them, not Saruman.

I did, however, enjoy watching Legolas walk on top of the snow.

[Aleldar]

Well with all these reviews, I won't have to spend any money on the movie.

[Georgi]

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn:
<STRONG>Yeah, I did notice that, though I still enjoyed watching the little wizard duel(even though it could've been far more spectacular ). But did you notice that he wasn't making use of his staff when he was 'fighting' against Saruman during the storm on that mountain?</STRONG>

Yeah, I enjoyed the wizard duel I didn't notice that on the mountain... I'll watch out for it the next time I see it

<STRONG>I did, however, enjoy watching Legolas walk on top of the snow.</STRONG>

Well, let's face it, you'd probably enjoy watching Legolas doing... well, just about anything, right? Admittedly, he did look good in the fight scenes

[ 12-20-2001: Message edited by: Georgi ]

[Georgi]

Originally posted by Aleldar:
<STRONG>Well with all these reviews, I won't have to spend any money on the movie.</STRONG>

Your loss

[Aleldar]

Originally posted by Georgi:
<STRONG>Your loss </STRONG>

Georgi you are the love of my life and you wound me like that. I'm hurt.

[Georgi]

Originally posted by Aleldar:
<STRONG>Georgi you are the love of my life and you wound me like that. I'm hurt. </STRONG>

Deal with it And stop spamming this thread

[Aleldar]

Originally posted by Georgi:
<STRONG>Deal with it And stop spamming this thread </STRONG>

But, my love. You are on this thread, I can't help it. Are you abandoning our passion for each other??

[Kayless]

[url="http://www.suntimes.com/output/ebert1/cst-ftr-lord19f.html"]Roger Ebert's review[/url] has touched upon the feelings EMINEM and others have expressed.

Originally posted by Roger Ebert:
<STRONG>That "Fellowship of the Ring" doesn't match my imaginary vision of Middle-earth is my problem, not yours.</STRONG>

This pretty much sums things up. The movie is masterfully crafted but if you set up impossible standards, the chances of the film reaching them will be, well, impossible. Look what happened with die-hard Star Wars fans who went into the Phantom Menace expecting the Second Coming. I actually found the movie superior to the book in some respects: namely I found the film to be a more viscerally exhilarating experience than the more meandering and cerebral novel, and was amazed with the great sense of suspense the film produces. View it for what it is, not what we wish it was.

[Kayless]

Originally posted by Georgi:
<STRONG> Then again, I was probably distracted with horror at the line "Let's hunt some orc"... </STRONG>

Call me a boorish American, but that line didn’t horrify me all that much. (Now if he had said "Let's lock and load", it would be a different story).

Originally posted by Georgi:
<STRONG> A very minor point about Gandalf, I thought it was kind of strange that in the fight with Saruman, his entire power seemed to be invested in his staff. (@Saturn I guess you probably noticed that, since we were discussing a similar thing re. Harry Potter and wands ) As soon as he lost it, he was powerless, which seems rather odd for such a powerful wizard.</STRONG>

It's not all that strange actually. It’s been a while since I’ve read "The Two Towers" but I believe there are multiple lines which indicate that Tolkien’s wizards are almost powerless without their staffs. I doubt the movie just made it up.

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn:
<STRONG>I still enjoyed watching the little wizard duel(even though it could've been far more spectacular ).</STRONG>

Many Tolkien fans on other boards felt this scene this was horrendously clichéd and inappropriate (I don't share this particular viewpoint).

Which brings me to one of the things I really like about the wizards (and all the characters) in LotR. They're not all-powerful ubermunchkins like Elminster (of D&D's Realms) who can swat armies single-handedly. A dozen orcs and a cave troll can be a serious threat to even a powerful wizard in Middle-Earth. Good guys with weaknesses are cool.

[ 12-20-2001: Message edited by: Kayless ]

[Nightmare]

The line: "Lets hunt some Orc" didn't horrify me either. And I'm not American.

[scully1]

Originally posted by Aleldar:
<STRONG>Well with all these reviews, I won't have to spend any money on the movie. </STRONG>

Heh *Loner sits back with hot buttered popcorn, saving gas money while awaiting more reviews*

[Georgi]

Originally posted by Kayless:
<STRONG>Call me a boorish American, but that line didn’t horrify me all that much. (Now if he had said "Let's lock and load", it would be a different story).</STRONG>

Boorish American
Seriously... It's just not something that Tolkien would have one of his characters say. Ever. To me, it's Hollywood cliche. *shrugs*
(But I expect lines like that in Star Trek movies )

<STRONG>It's not all that strange actually. It’s been a while since I’ve read "The Two Towers" but I believe there are multiple lines which indicate that Tolkien’s wizards are almost powerless without their staffs. I doubt the movie just made it up.</STRONG>

Ah, I have yet to read The Two Towers I thought it might have been a decision made for the movie.

[Kayless]

Okay, I just broken out my decrepit copy of the “The Two Towers” and found the following scenes:

The guard still hesitated. “Your staff,” he said to Gandalf. “Forgive me, but that too must be left at the doors.”
“Foolishness!” said Gandalf. “Prudence is one thing, but discourtesy is another. I am old. If I may not lean on my stick as I go, then I will sit out here, until it pleases Theoden to hobble out to speak with me.”
Aragorn laughed. “Every man has something too dear to trust to another. But would you part an old man from his support? Come, will you not let us enter?”
“The staff in the hand of a wizard may be more than a prop for age,” said Hama. He looked hard at the ash-staff which on which Gandalf leaned. “Yet in doubt a man of worth will trust his wisdom. I believe you are friends and worthy of honor, who have no evil purpose. You may go in.”

And later on in that same chapter:

”The wise speak only of what they know, Grima son of Galmrod. A witless worm have you become. Therefore be silent, and keep your forked tongue behind your teeth. I have not passed through fire and death to bandy crooked words with a servant-man till the lightning falls.”
He raised his staff. There was a roll of thunder. The sunlight was blotted out from the eastern windows; the whole hall became suddenly dark as night. The fire faded to sudden embers. Only Gandalf could be seen, standing white and tall before the blackened hearth.
In the gloom they heard the hiss of Wormtongue’s voice: “Did I not council you, lord, to forbid his staff? That fool, Hama, has betrayed us!” There was a flash as if lightning had cloven the roof. Then all was silent. Wormtongue was sprawled on his face.

[Sailor Saturn]

'Possible Spoilers'

Originally posted by Kayless:
<STRONG>It's not all that strange actually. It’s been a while since I’ve read "The Two Towers" but I believe there are multiple lines which indicate that Tolkien’s wizards are almost powerless without their staffs. I doubt the movie just made it up. </STRONG>

Are you referring to when Gandalf, Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas arrive at where Théodin King is? The doorman tries to make Gandalf leave his staff at the entrance because he is a wizard. Gandalf basically refuses and talks the doorman into letting him keep his staff with him.

While this could be interpretted as wizards being 'powerless' without their staffs, I don't see it that way. Wizards, and this is common in numerous fantasy that I've seen, channel magic through their staffs, but it is not a requirement for them to cast spells. The staff is more of a trademark, and in the case of Gandalf, and possibly Saruman, a 'magical artifact.'

I did just remember something else. I don't know if it is in The Two Towers or The Return of the King(?). When Gandalf, along with Theodin King, Treebeard, and most of the Fellowship, confronts Saruman at Orthanc, Gandalf breaks Saruman's staff. Since Saruman had already been weakened dramatically, I took the breaking of the staff as more of a symbolic thing, saying that Saruman is no longer considered one of the Wizards. If you remember, Saruman still had the "power" to manipulate with words.

IIRC, the Wizards are of an actual race and that's basically what makes them Wizards. If that is the case, it would seem unlikely that their powers are solely confined within their staffs.

[Kayless]

SS, see my previous post for the exact quotes. I disagree with Saruman bascially being powerless prior to having his staff broken. It was a very necessary action on Gandalf's part and not merely a symbolic guesture. (I'm not exactly comfortable classifying something over thirty years old as spoiler worthy but if you haven't read "The Two Towers" then you might want to skip this)

(Gandalf to Saruman)"But you will surrender to me the key of Orthanc, and your staff. They shall be pledges of your conduct, to be returned later, if you merit them."

and...

He raised his hand, and spoke slowly in a clear cold voice. "Saruman, your staff is broken." There was a crack, and the staff split asunder in Saruman's hand, and the head of it fell down at Gandalf's feet. "Go!" said Gandalf. With a cry Saruman fell back and crawled away.

Notice that Gandalf demanded Saurman's staff before being forced to break it (and seemed to feel that the desire to get it back would be good insentive for Saruman to reform as well as depriving him of power). Saurman never uses any magic after his staff is broke, which I think is pretty conclusive proof. The "power" to manipulate with words is just that, a high Charisma on Saruman's part, not magically related.

[ 12-20-2001: Message edited by: Kayless ]

[Sailor Saturn]

Possible Spoiler, not that it really matters, I'm sure.

Originally posted by Kayless:
<STRONG>SS, see my previous post for the exact quotes. I disagree with Saruman bascially being powerless prior to having his staff broken. It was a very necessary action on Gandalf's part and not merely a symbolic guesture. (I'm not exactly comfortable classifying something over thirty years old as spoiler worthy but if you haven't read "The Two Towers" then you might want to skip this)

(Gandalf to Saruman)"But you will surrender to me the key of Orthanc, and your staff. They shall be pledges of your conduct, to be returned later, if you merit them."

and...

He raised his hand, and spoke slowly in a clear cold voice. "Saruman, your staff is broken." There was a crack, and the staff split asunder in Saruman's hand, and the head of it fell down at Gandalf's feet. "Go!" said Gandalf. With a cry Saruman fell back and crawled away.

Notice that Gandalf demanded Saurman's staff before being forced to break it (and seemed to feel that the desire to get it back would be good insentive for Saruman to reform as well as depriving him of power). Saurman never uses any magic after his staff is broke, which I think is pretty conclusive proof. The "power" to manipulate with words is just that, a high Charisma on Saruman's part, not magically related.</STRONG>

I agree that the "power" to manipulate probably was mostly high Charisma, though I think he mixed a little magic into his words.

IIRC, originally, it was Saruman the White and Gandalf the Grey. When Saruman "joined" Sauron, in the book it describes Saruman's robes as going from white to the multi-color effect of a 'broken' ray of light. He was no longer Saruman the White. Gandalf, in turn, replaced Saruman by becoming "the White" and no longer being Gandalf the Grey. "The White Rider" I believed they referred to him as. I, personally, saw it as Saruman's quest for power was his downfall, causing him to lose his power. The loss of his staff I saw more as a loss of rank and respect and such. The staffs were, obviously, endowed(sp?) with power of their own; but I do not believe that to be the sole source of the Wizard's power.


The important thing to remember, though, is that we each interpret it in our own way. No way is specifically wrong. As has been mentioned before, it is important to have our personal interpretations. It gives us our own little Middle-Earth to participate in.

[Kayless]

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn:
<STRONG>I agree that the "power" to manipulate probably was mostly high Charisma, though I think he mixed a little magic into his words. </STRONG>

This reminds me of Gandalf talking to the moth in the movie. Stripped of most of his power, he nonetheless can do a tiny act of magic which saves his life. A very cool scene.

Originally posted by Sailor Saturn:
<STRONG>The important thing to remember, though, is that we each interpret it in our own way. No way is specifically wrong. As has been mentioned before, it is important to have our personal interpretations. It gives us our own little Middle-Earth to participate in. </STRONG>

Very true, that. Though it's worth mentioning that the word 'Wizard' has a very specific meaning in LotR; it is intended as a translation of Istar, and applies only to those Maiar (spiritual beings of lower "rank" than the Valar) who came to Middle-earth in human form during the Third Age to help in the struggle against Sauron (the word's more general use, for any person who works magical acts, does not apply in this context). The term "incarnate angel" is approximately correct. Being incarnated limited their power (though whether or not it was limited to a vessel like their staves is up to interpretation ), and intentionally so, because their mission was to organize the resistance and to inspire the peoples of Middle-earth to help themselves, not to do the job for them. Their main temptation, then, was to try to speed up the process by dominating other free wills - a principle reason for their mission was to prevent such actions by Sauron.

Sauron himself was originally a Maia of Aulë's people, but he was corrupted by Melkor (the first Dark Lord) and became his most trusted lieutenant. In the Wars of Beleriand, Sauron was the most feared of Morgoth's servants, but after the War of Wrath and the expulsion of the first Dark Lord, Sauron rose to become the greatest enemy of Elves and Men in the Second and Third Ages.

The LotR is actually a very spirtual work.