As we've seen throughout the course of this blog, very few of the Best Picture nominees come from the sci-fi and fantasy genre. For the most part every film takes part on Planet Earth and usually visits an incident from recent history. However, in the early part of the 21st century, things changed as one of the most popular literary trilogies in history was adapted by New Zealand film-maker Peter Jackson. All three parts of The Lord of the Rings trilogy went on to be nominated for Best Picture, with the concluding chapter winning the top prize. This post will see me revisit all three films and present a fresh perspective on movies I first viewed on their opening days of release.
Although I bought the extended edition DVDs I've never actually gotten round to watching them and instead primarily purchased them because they'd look good in my collection. Unfortunately, for the purposes of this challenge, having extra scenes scattered throughout the films made the pace lag somewhat. As The Lord of The Rings is one of the most successful film franchises of all time; I don't think a recap of the plot is particularly necessary. Instead I will make my comments about each film starting with the opening chapter; The Fellowship of The Ring. For the opening part of a franchise, I felt The Fellowship did a good job of establishing the characters and getting all the major players into one place. However, perhaps due to me watching the extended cut, I found that Peter Jackson spent a little bit too much time at Bilbo Baggins' birthday bash and could've got the Hobbits on the road a tad quicker. Even a Middle Earth novice such as myself I understood the motivations for each character and the horrors that stood in their way as Frodo and Sam were tasked with dispatching 'the one ring' into Mount Doom. One of the biggest characters throughout the franchise, which was established about halfway through The Fellowship, was that of New Zealand itself. Director Peter Jackson's native country was chosen as the backdrop for the film and it served its purpose well, convincing this viewer that I was watching events take place in a mystical land. Andrew Lesnie's Oscar-winning cinematography perfectly captures this backdrop and draws the viewer in throughout the three hour running time.
Cinematography was one of the four categories that The Fellowship of The Ring triumphed in, matching the total of that year's Best Picture winner A Beautiful Mind. The film won further awards for Best Visual Effects, Best Make-Up and Best Score for Howard Shore's iconic film music. Interestingly, of all of the three films, The Fellowship of The Ring garnered the most nominations of the trio and was also the only one to have an acting nod. That went to Ian Mckellen who lost the Supporting Actor award to fellow Brit Jim Broadbent; however his nomination was more than deserved. As Gandalf, McKellen is definitely the heart of the piece and his 'you shall not pass!' speech is as stirring today as it was over thirteen years ago. The problem with The Fellowship, and the trilogy as a whole, is that it's an ensemble piece so it's particularly hard to pick out one or two performances. If I were to highlight other turns in this first film then they would be Viggo Mortensen's swashbuckling performance as Aragon and Christopher Lee's scenery chewing efforts as Saruman. One thing I would say about the film is that it has the perfect balance of light and shade, building up the tension so when the big moments strike they feel important. The fellowship's final battle with the orcs was especially moving and perfectly bridged the gap between the trilogy's first two films.
Of the three films, I definitely found The Two Towers the hardest to watch as it takes its sweet time getting to the majestic Battle for Helm's Deep. There are several problems, most of them to do with the introduction of new characters; most of whom aren't that interesting and seemingly are there to slow down the flow of the narrative. For example David Wenham's Faramir briefly slows down Sam and Frodo's journey to Mount Doom before letting them continue their journey. Merry and Pippin's whole plot in the second film is possibly the dullest as they're stuck travelling with the tiresome Treebeard. Meanwhile Aragon has trouble diverting the case of the pretty and assertive Eowyn; who is infinitely more interesting than his true love Arwen. However, thankfully there is one character that makes a difference and is to some the most memorable part of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. I'm talking of course about Gollum; the slimy creature played with such relish by the fantastic Andy Serkis. Serkis' debut as Gollum singled him out as the master of the motion capture suit; a legacy he has since cemented as Caesar in the Planet of The Apes films. The fact that Serkis has yet to be nominated for an Oscar for playing either character is a travesty and one that I hope will be rectified soon. Gollum's inclusion in the Sam and Frodo plot also put some tension between the lifelong friends and gave this second film a bit of edge that the first one sorely lacked.
Aside from Serkis the only other new cast member who I'd single out is Bernard Hill as King Theoden who is initially possessed by Saruman. Hill was convincing as a worn out leader who'd let magic take over him and was equally at home when he was tasked with commanding armies in the film's latter scenes. As I insinuated, The Two Towers was the toughest watch and was therefore the one film in the trilogy that I was surprised to see in the Best Picture category. Maybe the academy just wanted some sort of symmetry or they were just taken aback by the motion capture technology employed by Serkis. However, it's clear that generally The Two Towers wasn't as well-regarded as The Fellowship as it only received six nominations. Of those nods, most of which were in the technical categories, it only received two awards for sound effects editing and visual effects. While I understand that not every second instalment can be The Empire Strikes Back, I found The Two Towers dragged at times and I did honestly feel as if I'd never get through the Lord of The Rings. Thank God then for Serkis whose performance as Gollum saved the film for me and made genuinely excited to see the third and final film.
That film, The Return of the King, went on to become one of the most successful films in Oscar history tying both Titanic and Ben-Hur at eleven wins a piece. It also won every award it was nominated for including triumphs in the Best Picture and Best Director categories. Some would argue that The Return of the King's clean sweep was the Academy's way of honouring the trilogy as a whole and in some cases that's plain to see. For example wins the costumes and art direction are unchanged throughout the three films yet for some reason they were only Oscar-worthy during The Return of the King. However, I would argue that it's the best film of the three and it was definitely the one I found easiest to watch. From the undead army to Shelob the giant spider; The Return of the King continues the visual splendour that the first two films deal with so well. At the same time I found the story utterly gripping, especially the scenes in which Gollum manipulates Frodo into believing Sam is trying to steal the ring. Whilst Serkis is at the top of his game once again, I found Sean Astin's turn as Sam to be utterly mesmerising as he perfectly conveyed his character's innocence. Elijah Wood deserves similar praise for his affecting turn as Frodo who in this film in particular has to deal with a lot of perilous situations. Everything was brought together brilliantly and I was totally on the edge of my seat as Frodo was perched in Mount Doom deciding whether or not to keep the ring. Even though I already knew the outcome I found myself compelled to keep watching and I'm glad I did.
One thing that The Return of The King is constantly criticised for is the fact that it just won't end. Following Frodo and Sam's successful time at Mount Doom, we are shown Aragon's coronation and Sam's wedding before the final scenes air. At the time I was of the opinion that The Return of the King did indeed have one too many endings but I feel that that was to do with already having sat through a three hour film at the cinema. In the comfort of my own living room, these feelings changed and I had no problem with seeing the characters I'd followed for the best part of nine hours settle down before seeing each other for the last time. When evaluating The Return of The King worthiness as a Best Picture winner I have to think about whether it works if you didn't watch the first two films. Obviously if you did that then it would be a little silly, however I do feel that you'd lose some of the context about the characters and wouldn't be rooting for the Hobbits as much if you hadn't followed them from the first moment they left The Shire. That being said, The Return of The King is definitely the strongest part of the trilogy and brings together the best elements of the other two films. It's stunning to watch, capitalises on new technology and brings out the best in its ensemble cast. Ultimately I would say that The Return of The King is deserving of its place in the Best Picture pantheon even if I do think the Academy were giving the Oscar to the entire trilogy.
Next time we have a bit of a breather from the epics with some quirky characters and award-winning scripts.
No comments:
Post a Comment