|
Like many movie fans, I was looking forward to seeing both “Lord of the Rings: Fellowship
of the Ring" and “Harry Potter: the Sorcerer’s Stone." I haven’t read the books so my
reactions are based on whether or not I had an enjoyable movie experience.
Harry Potter, based on the J.K. Rowling book, put the spell on me and met two of my
primary criteria of being a successful 2+ hours movie: time passed without my awareness
and, most critically, no fanny fatigue! Sadly, Lord of the Rings didn’t meet this
criterion.
The J.K. Rowling story held together well on the big screen. While thoroughly absorbed in
this magical world, I felt genuine sympathy for Harry’s plight as the unwanted child who
discovers he’s a talented sorcerer. The young actors who played his friends also did
some of the finest character work and conveyed distinct personalities and pathos, instead
of the usual bland characterizations I’ve come to expect from the “big event" movie.
Of course, the set design was incredible as were the effects, absolutely de rigueur for
this type of movie. The Quidditch game was spectacular and worth the price of admission
alone as was the wonderful establishing shot of the dining hall at Halloween. The food
stylist deserves an Oscar for that amazing spread.
However, in addition to the excellent, well-structured story, one thing put this movie
into the category of greatness for me: its surprising themes. For a fantasy movie, the
thematic aspects were delightful and not heavy handed in the least and refreshingly
grounded in reality. Harry was warned not to fall too in love with his hopeful fantasies,
for it could lead to the path of his destruction. At the end, Harry’s friend was awarded
for challenging Harry and his posse. This brave young friend was told, ‘Anyone can stand
up to his or her enemies, but it takes a special person to stand up to their friends.’ At
that point, I jumped out of my chair and cheered. I found this a winning experience all
the way around.
Lord of the Rings certainly satisfied in the set design, costuming, makeup, effects
categories, but left me a little cold story wise. Cate Blanchett gave a wonderfully
complex portrayal as a fairy like queen and her performance is a definite “no miss." Ian
McCllelan was competent as the kind old wizard, but something didn’t quite come together
for me in his portrayal.
While Elijah Wood charmed as the decent Hobbit who is above the foibles of man and beast,
I didn’t feel the same kind of connection with him as I did with Harry Potter. I didn’t
feel like I got under his skin the way I did Dorothy’s in the Wizard of Oz, a girl with a
similarly pure heart. There was no sense of longing or confusion in his sweet angelic face
or, more importanty, in the story.
I also felt a bit cheated with the way the movie ended. I couldn’t help feeling like I was
treated to half a movie and the reel broke in the projection booth, not the best
impression to make for the non-nutballs of the books. They were a bit repetitive with
their story points as well, the same actors saying the same things at different points in
the movie. I guess it helps if you read the books first, but this is an unfair requirement
for moviegoers looking for a complete experience. Although Star Wars was a trilogy when
it was first released in the 70’s, each movie ended at a satisfying point. The audience I
saw LOTR with sat quietly at the end and mumbled, “Is that it? After three hours? My
butt’s asleep."
Structurally, director Peter Jackson kept hinting at the final show down at the lava pit
(sorry, I had to use a Xenaism), but never paid it off. It was just one more obstacle to
get through to an open ending so they're sure to rope us in for the sequel. Not enough of
a pay off after three hours of fanny fatigue. A secondary character dying at the finale
(a character who we didn't really get to know anyway) didn't do it for me after that huge
build up. And Frodor’s best friend jumping in the lake seemed more stupid and sentimental
after all the peril they'd been through.
I checked into the alt.fan.tolkien newsgroup and found many fans who appreciated the film
and some who didn’t for surprising reasons. Sean Ellis wrote, "Well the racism in LOTR is
undeniable. Tolkien invented races in which evidently, every single individual was evil.
Given that these races were fictitious, it is hardly a comment on humanity. Indeed, in his
work all humanity was one race, even the dark-skinned humans though unfortunately,
dark-skinned humans are mentioned only in reference to armies under the control of Sauron
(the evil force)."
No matter what you see, have fun at the movies!
|
"Harry Potter vs. LOTR"
