Sunday, July 5, 2015

The Lord of the Rings Trilogy


RATING: A+

Normally, I won't be doing this type of review where I review a whole trilogy in one. But this trilogy (and the Hobbit) are so closely back-to-back-to-back--that if I actually tried to review each movie individually, I'd probably end up repeating myself most of the way. My rating for all three movies is the same. My comments for all three movies are mostly the same. Very little would change. So here's something a little different...

Essentially, the Lord of the Rings is the penultimate fantasy series. Pretty much everyone's seen or read it (or both), or at least heard of and know a fair bit about it. Story's pretty simple, really, though it's a very long and has multiple threads. There's a magical dark ring that an evil lord who is only "mostly dead" wants back to conquer the world of Middle Earth. Who's gonna stop him? An alliance of the non-corrupted races of Middle Earth: men, elves, dwarves. Oh yeah, and hobbits--the tiny guys who end up doing a lot of the dirty work as Frodo Baggins, a hobbit, ends up being the one tasked with destroying the ring by taking it back to its own house and throwing it in the volcano it was created in. 

Should be a simple task, right? Yeah...no. 

Lord of the Rings has so many characters and side characters and side villains it may hard to be keep track of now and then. It's a pretty long trilogy, and if you watch the extended editions (which in my opinion is the route to go) each movie lasts about four hours. 

There's the Fellowship of the Ring, where they find out about the Ring having survived despite being at the bottom of an ocean for close to three millennia and begin the ultimate journey by creating the "Fellowship": Aragorn the human ranger, Legolas the elf, Gimli the dwarf, Boromir the... uh... guy, Gandalf the wizard, and the hobbits Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin. They all end up playing their own various roles throughout the trilogy. It's the simplest of the trilogy, as it focuses mostly on the main characters it concerns. 

Then there's the Two Towers, where the Fellowship has split up--with Frodo and Sam headed to Mordor (accompanied by the shifty Gollum), and most of the others trying to make sure the armies of the traitor wizard Saruman don't destroy the free world--and introduces a *lot* more characters, and ultimately ends in a fantastically executed battle sequence during a rainy night.

Finally, there's the Return of the King, where Frodo and Sam get closer to Mordor, while the rest of the company deals with the armies of Sauron himself. About a good half of the movie is one long battle; and it's a darn good one. Actually, it's multiple battles taking place within minutes of each other. The one in the Pelennor Fields is one of, if not the greatest battle sequence of all time and closes things up. 

There are very few complaints about this trilogy. Much of it is executed very well. The actors are mostly perfect for their roles, the soundtrack is quite well done, and the battle and action sequences are incredibly well done. Even the book-to-movie purists should be pleased--there are a couple changes that could be annoying, but they can be overlooked. Really, the only thing I flat out don't like about the trilogy (and this extends to the books too) is one of the perhaps inevitable but still disappointing ending scenes. However, it does not take away from the trilogy; or hardly even leave a sour taste in one's mouth; it's more of a gripe that can be, again, overlooked. 

The Lord of the Rings is a trilogy that is pretty much essential watching *and* reading. It's not quite the pinnacle of cinema, but it's not too far off either. I consider it to be the second best movie trilogy of all time, only behind the Dark Knight Trilogy. And that's nothing to be sneeze at. Lord of the Rings is perhaps long but still fantastic watching. 

No comments:

Post a Comment