| BIASES:
late 20s black male; frustrated screenwriter who favors action,
comedy, and glossy, big budget movies over indie flicks, kiddie
flicks, and weepy Merchant Ivory fare
MOVIE BIASES: The most critically overhyped movie in history.
Just hope it lives up to it.
MAJOR PLAYERS: Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, Viggo Mortensen, Ian
McKellen, based on the series by J.R.R. Tolkien, co-writer/producer/director
Peter Jackson.
To bone up for tonight’s three hour, 20 minute finale
to the Lord of the Rings trilogy, I went to an EXTENDED showing
of “The Two Towers” a few days ago that clocked
in at three hours, 45 minutes. Imagine the length of that
DVD trilogy box set next year. But with some six hours-plus
of emotional investment, childhood/fantasy geek fandom, and
overwhelmingly concurring critical mass behind us, expectations
for “Return of the King” have been set up to be
the surest thing since the band camp girl on prom night. All
you LOTR lovers can exhale now—“King” delivers.
Just a little too much.
 Starting
off with the visceral bang of Smeagol’s (Andy Serkis)
flashback acquisition of the ring and its mental and physical
deterioration of him, “King” flashes forward to
the present, where Frodo (Wood) and Sam (Astin) continue their
perilous trek towards the fires of Mt. Doom to destroy The
Ring, despite a Gollum/Smeagol orchestrated fissure in their
tight friendship.
Meanwhile, Sauron’s regrouped and is threatening with
an army of orcs and warlike creatures designed to wipe out
the race of men at the Gondor city of Minas Tirith. Among
the numerous subplots, Aragorn (Mortensen) faces up to the
responsibility of his regal past, the socially-conjoined hobbits
Pippin (Billy Boyd) and Merry (Dominic Monaghan) are separated
in exploits that test their valor, and Gandalf (McKellen)
rides around on a really cool, white horse as the one-man
epigram (“The board is set, the pieces are moving.”).
The critical hype is justified. This movie attacks all your
senses while bandying about timeless issues of honor, courage,
hope, faith, friendship, and trust. Unlike some OTHER trilogies
that ended this year, everything from the last movie is heightened.
Just when you thought nothing could top the Battle of Helm’s
Deep, there are not one but THREE set piece battles in “King”
that nearly top each other as they crop up. Sauron’s
an evil genius, with 70-foot wingspan flying beasts, huge
fire-tossing apparatuses, and giant, elephantine people-squashers.
Produced in-house at his owned and operated Weta special effects
studio, Jackson in this singular movie (and in the trilogy
as a whole) has employed the most impressive and apropos use
of CGI technology to date (take that “Phantom Menace”).
Hands down, this movie has the best battle scene special effects
ever in overall intensity and emotional complexity, barely
nudging out that of the “Star Wars” trilogy. Through
inventiveness and imagination not technology, Jackson’s
taken us to a new level. And because of the hours we’ve
spent with these characters the past two years, each battle
scene of impossible odds has real dramatic value, where every
swing or dagger thrust is worth so much to our emotional investment.
 Of
course, all that comes from Tolkien’s source material
and Jackson’s fanboy adaptation of it that we are so
married to the characters, their goals, and their arcs. You
smile at Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and Gimli’s (John Rhys-Davies)
running kill counts in the heat of battle, the platonically
heterosexual love banter between Pip and Merry, and the creepily
amusing battle for Gollum’s soul, who we would all agree
is easily the buffet table at a psychiatrists’ convention.
Howard Shore’s rousing musical score, while a continuation
of the themes from the first two movies, betters even himself,
saving the best for last in a triumphant, regal tone-setter
fit for a finale—and a coronation. Using a classically
written script soaked with old world glory, elocution, and
values, Jackson steps up directorially as well, showing brilliant
storytelling at times like his juxtaposition of an army’s
suicide charge into battle with a wretched king devouring
a bloody good meal. Jackson’s visual imagery is outstanding.
His pacing’s improved as well. Although still it takes
patience sometimes to sit through the brooding in this movie,
it’s not nearly as staccato as “The Two Towers,”
which ground to a halt whenever we cut away to Pip and Merry
chillin’ with the Treebeards.
But the real stars of this movie are the characters and the
actors who play them. It’s a shame Andy Serkis’
voiced (and acted out for a later CGI-filled in) Gollum couldn’t
be nominated for SOME kind of acting award from the Academy.
His Gollum is all treachery, shame, and split personality
behind two freaky, deceptive, big blue eyes, forever scheming,
forever lusting (for his “preeeeeeecioussssss”).
Mortensen is reliably heroic and a moody heartbreaker as Aragorn,
torn between a love with a woman he can’t have and one
that would love to have him. Miranda Otto’s brilliantly
played Eowyn herself ups her game by donning armor and flinging
herself headlong into battle better than most men. If you’ll
recall, in “Two Towers,” she was grumblingly left
to tend to the women and children even though she wanted to
fight with the men.
The completion of character arcs that we have seen develop
over three movies may be the most satisfying part of the experience,
particularly when it comes to Frodo and Sam. Although their
close knit bond gets tested by the weight of the ring’s
responsibility, the manipulative Gollum, and a natural distrust
of those with and who seek power, we see that the journey
is just as much Sam’s as it is Frodo’s; fitting
considering the sprawling nature of this ensemble classic
that encompasses everything from messages for global peace
and interracial dating to courage under fire and intestinal
fortitude of hopeless faith.
But I feel an unpopular assessment coming on. Despite all
of these technical and story achievements, end of the year
plaudits, and critical chest-thumping, “King”
simply goes on too long (like this review???), drags in some
places, and delivers a SATISFYING end to our three year journey,
but a slightly overdone one. The multiple endings not only
seem neverending, but also unnecessary (should’ve saved
them for DVD). It’s not egotistic excess on Jackson’s
part, just overexcitement from serving the voluminous source
material and his own imagination. Even though the battles
never feel repetitive (just the opposite; in fact, each one
feels even more overwhelmingly hope-deflating than the last,
involving us ever more), I could shave about half an hour
to forty minutes to get to a movie that I would want to see
again and again. Not to be an iconoclast in any way, nor a
part of the critical herd of sheep bleating at the feet of
this movie, but “Return of the King” gets…
@@@ REELS
(THREE REELS)
It’s pretty hot – go give it a shot.
|
