Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings is already recognized as the fantasy movie masterpiece of the decade. Rightfully so, as it is both a visual treat with carefully crafted details as well as a complete redition of JRR Tolkien’s work. As with any fantasy ecranization, many points are missed but it is not hard to go over that as the essential is preserved and richly presented.
Yet after viewing this fantasy movie for hundreds of times, little things come out to nibble at me. The fact that the story is hard to grasp unless one has the books at hands is normal and does not detract from enjoying the graphically detailed world of Middle Earth. But others, smaller things, are noticeable.
One question would be why did Frodo volunteer to take the ring back to Mount Doom? The movie reveals nothing of value in this regard, while the book speaks of Frodo’s alienation with the static life of the hobbits and fascination for Bilbo’s entreprises. Yet this is striking, because in both cases there is not enough information to justify diving in the middle of an epic-scale war. The reasoning that hobbits can’t continue their isolationism (a nod to UK politics in WWII) might work to motivate raising a hobbit army rather than a lonely mission behind enemy lines (all that given Frodo’s hobbit education, which seems to fly right out the window for no apparent reason).
One moment that bears note is Boromir’s first encounter with Aragorn in Elrond’s home during the Extended Edition. After a few seconds of staring, Boromir intelligently notes: You’re not an elf. So the dramatic moment when Boromir observes history on the beautiful tapestry is torn down with one dumb and useless line. The Extended Edition goes at greath lengths to paint Boromir differently than the Cinematic Edition. The latter shows him as almost a mindless thug which idiotically resents the conclusions of the experienced ancient elves, but is redeemed in self-sacrifice. The former shows him as a heroic but modest man, who obeys his father but still loves and thinks highly of his brother despite his father’s opinions and thus concludes his perceived thugness is simply a misguided bid at striking for ultimate peace.
My last of three observations about Lord of the Rings is related to the lackluster portrayal of women characters. In JRR Tolkien’s work, women have essential roles which are remarcably undetailed. The original trilogy lacks a lot of details so the movie version tried to push Arwen to the foreground, aggregating several minor characters in her actions. Despite this, the one crucial moment of Arwen’s fantasy career (her decision to defy her father and marry Aragorn) lacks the depiction of inner struggle that one would expect. Her musings resume to that’s what I decided and I’ll do it rather than an insight into Arwen’s view of duty as an elven princess, take on immortality and the like versus a life with a human.
