12/18/2003 - Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

I kinda hadn't planned on seeing the movie on its first day. Standing in line last year, only to get a dismal seat in the back row, had sort of turned me off to the feeding frenzy of opening day. Most of the shows at the Old Mill Cinema in Bend were sold out anyway. But I had tickets for Saturday afternoon, which, as it turned out, I wasn't going to be able to make, so I went down to the theater to trade them in against another day.

Fate would have it though that the lady in front of me in the ticket line had four tickets to sell for the 2:40pm show, and never one to turn down an unexpectedly good thing, I decided on a whim to buy a ticket. It was 2:25pm. I ran inside - and amidst the sea of teenagers, I snagged a lone but primo seat between a middle-aged woman and a soccer mom with her kids. I was ready.

Now, if movies are eye candy, then director Peter Jackson's trilogy stands alone as one of the most sumptious visual treats in cinematic history. And as expected, "The Return of the King" was no exception.

In an epic that has enthralled fans for the past 3 years - ever since the first teaser trailers were released onto the internet - spawned 2 (so far) Academy Award Nominations for "Best Movie", made millions of dollars in ticket sales and merchandising deals (down to the rather dumb "Duracell" battery commercials), and has ignited the economy of an entire country - New Zealand - the "Return" is indeed the crowning achievement.

To write a detailed review would be pointless however. For the movie really doesn't vary in greatness or style from the previous two. Rather, it is a seamless, natural, and logical continuation of "The Two Towers", bringing the story to a graceful and satisfying conclusion. So it's not a matter of whether or not it's worth to go see it - that's really a no-brainer for anybody who has seen the previous two movies - but rather if it can hold up to the high standards the prequels have set. And that, without doubt, it certainly can.

Could it stand alone simply an entertaining piece of film however? The answer is no. For somebody watching this movie without having seen its predessors, it's a rather pointless exercise. The storyline too much depends on the audience being in the know about prior events and characters.

So instead of marveling at the greatness of this movie, I found myself awed by the imagination, determination and attention for detail Peter Jackson has shown in making these three movie. Filming over something like 16 months under all imaginable conditions (good to bad to very bad), while providing jobs, shelter and food for thousands of people (cast, crew, extras), he was able to create a 10-hour epic of grandios, yet consistent proportions - while at the same time coaxing good, if not great, performances out of a high-caliber cast.

Sure, there are plenty of other things to admire in the "Return": the breath-taking landscape of New Zealand that yet again plays a large part in believably doubling for Middle Earth. The amazing sets - especially the awesome beauty of the White City, Minas Tirith, the crown jewel of Gondor. The special effects - Shelob, the spider; the Army of the Dead; as well as the war mammoths, were certainly CGI achievements that will go down in history.

And last but not least - a dynamic cast that brings the characters to life in all their rottenness and glory. Ian McKellen's talent lights up every scene he's in - and not just because his Gandalf is cloaked in gleaming white. Viewers can again feast their eyes on the magnificent beauty of Liv Tyler's Arwen - enhanced by her spectacular wardrobe - if only too briefly. Viggo Mortensen on the other hand is given plenty of screen time to shine as the Ranger-turned-King, although his acting is seriously subdued by the action-saturated storyline (we shall look forward to seeing him in Hidalgo). And not surprisingly, every appearance of Orlando Bloom's Legolas drew cries of excitement and cheers from the ladies in the audience (especially after the marvelous battle sequence, in which he single-handedly takes down one of the war mammoths with his elvish skill and light-footedness) - for after last summer's Pirates of the Caribbean, he is the hottest male property in Hollywood now. Never mind that nobody's seen him truly "act" so far... Points need also be given to Elija Wood and Sean Astin for the portrayal of Frodo and Sam's undying friendship, even in the face of the greatest evil.

That all said - the "Return" does have one giant flaw. The 20-something-minute ending is simply too long and way too tear-jerking. The scenes where Frodo is reunited with the rest of the Fellowship are so absurdly fluffy, that the audience broke out in laughter instead of being truly emotionally touched. Mute, teary gazes exchanged between the characters turn almost cheesy due to their extensive length. One can only hope that Peter Jackson comes to his senses and shortens those scenes for the DVD release. And yet - both the middle-aged woman on my left and the soccer mom on my right were sniveling into their Kleenexes...

There were also a few other things that bothered me: Aragorn's walk through the Haunted Mountains seemed too short and not scary enough. The demise of Wormtongue and Saruman was blatantly omitted, as well as the scouring of the Shire upon the hobbit's return, which after all constitutes a 40-page part in the book. Would anybody who hadn't read the books notice though? Probably not.

As such, it's hard to critize a movie of that scope and greatness. And to be fair, the extended DVD versions of the "Fellowship" and "Two Towers" often included scenes that were cut from the theatrical versions, but are cherished by the True Followers of the Ring for filling those small gaps in the book's storyline.

The bottom line is that all three movies have exceeded the expectations of the fans and even that of the casual movie-goer. They are a triumph for the world of movies, and most of all for Peter Jackson. The only open question now: What will he come up with next?