The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

Directed by: Peter Jackson | 179 minutes | action, drama, horror, war, adventure, romance, fantasy | Actors: Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, Ian McKellen, Ian Holm, Dominic Monaghan, Billy Boyd, Viggo Mortensen, Liv Tyler, Christopher Lee, Hugo Weaving, John Rhys-Davies, Sean Bean, Orlando Bloom, Cate Blanchett, Andy Serkis

Only people who have roughly lived under a rock for the first five years of this millennium will be unfamiliar with the gigantic and hugely successful film project ‘The Lord of the Rings’, an adaptation of Professor JRR Tolkien’s world-famous fantasy novel. Until then, New Zealand filmmaker Peter Jackson, who had hitherto only been known in cult circles, took care of the adaptation of the book, which had always been considered unfilmable, and he did this in an unparalleled way, with such flair, such an eye for detail, and such love for the story, characters and world as described in Tolkien’s epic, which has made it pretty much a masterpiece. For all the skeptics who didn’t entrust Tolkien’s classic in the hands of this Kiwi named Peter Jackson, “the most unlikely person imaginable” (as hobbit Bilbo is called in the film, when he obtains the Ring), a quote from the first film of the “trilogy”, ‘The Fellowship of the Ring’: “Even the smallest person can change the course of the future”. Jackson made history with his ‘The Lord of the Rings’. He single-handedly gave the fantasy genre prestige, won (together) 17 Oscars with his film adaptation, and with Gollum he created a digital character for the first time that really comes to life among the real actors. A major achievement.

It all started in 2001 with ‘The Fellowship of the Ring’. In a way, this movie was the most important. If Jackson hadn’t been able to convince the audience with this film, if he hadn’t been able to depict the fanciful world of Middle-earth and its characters satisfactorily enough, it would have looked bleak for films 2 and 3. The first film has continued like this. its own difficulties to be overcome. Get your hands on it: explain a mythological history with many races and complicated names, introduce nine main characters and a handful of side characters, unclutter the geography, all in an elegant, smooth way, without confusing or putting people to sleep to drop. And then there are also battles with a multitude of monsters and “orcs”, and different locations to be scoured over hundreds of kilometers. And all that within three hours. That is not enough. But Jackson pulls it off.

With an effective, jaw-dropping prologue explaining the story of the Ring – who was Sauron’s villain and how the jewel ended up in the hands of a hobbit from the Shire – the viewer is refreshed in minutes and is ready to go a little later. with the hobbits to begin the real story. While speed is required – because there is a lot to tell – it is important to spend some time in the Shire, as this place and its inhabitants are the heart of the film. This is what Frodo and his friends are fighting for; for the hope that this rustic spot will never be lost. It’s also important for the viewer to bond with these easy-going hobbits first, so that they are committed to their fate and willing to go along with the imaginative story.

That is probably also one of the reasons that Jackson’s film(s) has found such a large audience, despite the fantasy genre: the realistic level and the recognizability of the emotions. No winking, over-the-top style is used, but a serious tone (perhaps too serious at times), and a reasonable restraint with “magic”. For example, the wizards in this movie(s) don’t shoot lightning bolts from their rods, as is common in the genre. Gandalf the sorcerer is a three-dimensional character, who is sometimes smiling, sometimes petulant, sometimes unfathomable, and also makes mistakes. He is superbly portrayed by Ian McKellen, who was rightfully nominated for an Oscar. This philosophy, that the story and its world should be taken seriously, extends throughout the production. The crew had to treat the story, just as Tolkien himself did, as if it were real history. That means that really the smallest details – from the decorations in the houses and the finish of the swords of the different peoples, to the rings on the chain mail – were examined and perfected. Everything breathes authenticity, which makes it easier for the viewer to be sucked into this world and the adventure.

Because it is compelling. Everything is pulled out. First, the monsters: hideous orcs, an intimidating cave troll, a water monster with tentacles, and an “old world devil”: the phenomenally resurrected Balrog, who is a crucial obstacle for our heroes. Apart from respect for the book, one of the reasons for Jackson to embark on this perilous project was his love for (movie) monsters. And it can be seen that he (also) put a lot of love into this aspect. Almost all creatures seem to have a personality and stay with the viewer. You almost feel sorry for the cave troll when he is finally defeated and – with a sad roar and a finger touching his lip for a moment – ​​falls to the ground.

Second, the action scenes. To say that ‘The Fellowship of the Ring’ has good action is an understatement. One nail-biting fight comes along, time and time again in a whirlwind way by Andrew Lesnie, who uses handheld camera work (like in the mines of Moria), a tracking system that floats the camera over the forest to track the running Uruk-hai (special orcs), and also several times from a descending camera, often to peek into the caves of Isengard, where the corrupt wizard Saruman plots his nefarious schemes and his orcs forging weapons.

Third: the drama and emotions. While you never really learn much about the characters, you soon take them to heart. The elf and the dwarf (Legolas and Gimli) who can’t stand each other, yet slowly become friends; the wizard (Gandalf) who shows that he has a lot of human traits and especially has a soft spot for hobbits; the insecure king-to-be (Aragorn) who must slowly assume a leadership role. The proud Boromir who wants nothing more than the power to defend his people but makes wrong choices and has a strained relationship with Aragorn; and finally the innocent Frodo, who has a warm relationship with his uncle Bilbo, but especially with his friend-through-thick-and-thin Sam. Together, these two form the beating heart of the film.

Because heart has the film, and it is possible, even if the heart strings are sometimes played very clearly, that you as a viewer will shed a tear before the credits roll by. Despite all the intense action and the fantastic monsters, it is the emotions that ensure that the film stays with you. The fact that the action is ultimately indelible also has to do not only with the excitement that comes with it, but also with the consequences for and reactions of the beloved characters. The fact that the film sometimes feels a bit episodic – like a succession of action scenes – and that the characters (with each other) could have been given a little more depth here and there (which is partly remedied in the long version of the film) is something you are happy to accept when the film as a whole makes such an impression. ‘The Fellowship of the Ring’ offers adventure with a capital “A”, gripping drama (with one of the best death scenes in cinema history), and knows how to conjure Tolkien’s fantastic world and interesting characters on the silver screen with conviction. On to the next chapter: ‘The Two Towers’.