The Fantasy Hall of Fame

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




Lord of the Rings might be a series that gets progressively worse as it goes along but 2001's start is fairly amazing. Watching this film again 10 years or so later it is remarkable to me how well certain things hold up and how the character arcs of certain players in the story unfold. In a number of ways Tolkien subverts the narrative by having us believe that Frodo is the lead in the story, he's the one given the magical ring and he's the one who's bloodline is tied to the power and yet I feel Sam (Sean Astin) is the one that really plays the prototypical lead. Perhaps it's the sensibilities of changing times and that Sam is the more flawed protagonist he's really the stronger...if not strongest character.


Ian Mckellen received an acting nomination for his work and once again 20 years later he's still very strong and grounds the film. The entire third act is almost ignored because once Gandalf leaves the story we just sort of meander.



The wonder in the story really is in it's world building, the prologue is this sweeping epic battle (that sadly we know will never be matched). And then we are treated to a series of flashbacks and exposition dumps(which are very strange to see retold in The Hobbit). Though watching the film for a third time I still don't get what the rings actually do to merit such perversion from so many characters. The other issue I have with the film is that several of the main characters have very shallow and dull personalities. Legolis and Gimli are warriors but aside from physical features they seem to lack personality. Boromir is a lot more interesting...the Human prince whose lands border Mordor but he's well...he's got problems so to speak.


What I really loved about the film is the interweaving of monsters in the story. The Wraiths, Balroc, Orc's, Sauron, Saruman all look good have distinctive motives and help move the story along. Even though it's the first part of a trilogy the great use of villains allows the film to hold up as a self contained story. This is in my opinion Peter Jackson's best film.

I was planning on saving the LotR films for last, but seeing just two reviews for Fellowship has already made me want to watch them sooner. Once more reviews go up, I might not be able to wait haha.

The Fellowship of the Ring was the first film I saw twice in theatres. I then continued that trend with its two sequels. It's not like the viewings were really close together though, since our local theatre only had one screen and we typically got films months late. But I made the trip into town to the bigger theatre to see them when they were actually new, then watched them again with my friends when our theatre finally got them.

__________________

Sounds like you need to watch them again. Extended versions. Back to back to back. Get on it.....

Yeah I kinda wish we could get a Two Towers nomination because I'm going to end up watching that one between the two films. I ended up watching Fellowship over three nights, one of the things I really love about it is all of it's natural stopping points.


Normally I like to take my time but I might just end up buzzing through this Hall fairly quickly.

Yeah, I thought the same thing. I’m going to just watch all three anyways.
Saving them for the end since they’re so long

The Extended Editions are the only ones I own haha. I think I last watched them sometime around 2010-2011, so they're certainly due for another viewing. Given that they run 11.5 hours together, I doubt I'd ever be able to watch them back-to-back though. Maybe I could've given it a shot when I was a teenager, but definitely not now haha.

There's still 5 days left for late entries, so maybe someone will want to round out the trilogy. Though I doubt anyone other than me likes the middle film enough to nominate it.

The last time I watched the extended editions, I did Fellowship and The Two Towers each over two nights, stopping when it prompted me to change discs. I planned to do the same for RotK, but the cut point between discs was not in a good place, so I just watched that one in a single sitting. Not sure what I'll do this time.

Back to back to back I say!
Haha. I have not seen the extended versions yet. Kind of don’t want to due to the sheer amount of time it’ll consume

In what's probably another unpopular opinion of mine, I actually like the extended edition of The Two Towers the most. If I had to pick just one, it would be that one. I don't think the additions to Fellowship are that important, though I like the extra scenes with Boromir. Some of the scenes only in the extended version of RotK shouldn't have been cut in the first place, but that film is kind of long enough as it is haha.

From what I remember, I liked the Snow Maiden segment the most the last time. I only remember three of the stories so it's probably the fourth (not the black hair or tattoo thing) that I disliked back then. Not sure about that though.

About the LotR trilogy. I will definitely watch the extended versions (especially in the first two films they really improve the experience). Also, I'm quite sure that I'm (at least before these rewatches) with CR2 and like the second one the most.

__________________

The Dark Crystal (1982)
I must be getting more sensitive to some dark elements in movies as I get older. I didn't remember the bug-like army, the grotesque-looking, eyeball-removing character, or the torture of draining the essence of the Gelflings. I know that I watched this movie when I was younger, and I liked it. I even bought the DVD based on memories of how much I liked it back then, but sadly, it just didn't stand the test of time for me.

It's a visually impressive movie, but the story just seems to be lacking something. I wanted to see more of Jen's quest to find the crystal, more of the connection between Jen and Kira, and learn more about the characters. It just felt like it was a thin line that should have been fleshed out more. (I knew that the characters weren't developed enough when my favorite character was the little furry fuzzball, Fizzgig.)

I didn't dislike the movie. I just felt like it was made more to be a visual masterpiece than an epic story. It didn't know if it wanted to be a story of good vs. evil, an adventure, a romance, or a kids' movie, so it ended up being a little bit of each, but not enough of any.

__________________
.
If I answer a game thread correctly, just skip my turn and continue with the game.
OPEN FLOOR.

Fizzgig was my favorite character too. I didn't like Jen or Kira so I was happy to see Kira get the life drained out of her! bwahahaha

Fizzgig looked like a big tribble with a face and big teeth when he opened his mouth, but somehow, he still seemed lovable.

I felt that way when I saw it as a kid as well. I didn't mind Kira so much this time, but I still don't like anything about Jen - his design, (lack of) personality, or voice.

A tribble ha, I hadn't thought of that but yeah. I thought of Fizzgig as a cat-dog, like if you crossed a fuzzy little dog with a cat.

It's the emotionless face of the puppet, that makes them look un-alive to me. Where as the bad guys, the Skeksis, had oodles of personality, which made them very interesting. I did think the energy draining device made for the most emotional scene in the movie. It was pretty dramatic how first the poor captive's eyes go hazy, then the skin grows pale as their hair turns gray & wiry, then their whole face shrinks and withers...I could see that scaring the hell out of a little kid back in the day.

Despite what my rating might imply, I don't hate DragonHeart. It's harmless at the very least, often very fun fantasy adventure film. The acting is poor to decent, and some of the special effects are pretty cool for 1996.

Unfortunately, I found myself forgetting each scene five minutes after they ended. The movie gives off a slightly creepy vibe, which I'm sure was not the intention. I'm not sure if it's Sean Connery's odd voice acting, or the dragon's unnatural movements, or maybe the entire "heart-sharing" thing in the first place. The movie has great intentions about doing good and sacrificing yourself for the right thing, but considering I didn't care for any of the characters, I wasn't particularly rooting for one character to live or die.

While the score was not fantastic by any means, I'm also a huge sucker for grand orchestral scores... and there are some catchy melodies in there too, which is about the only thing that I was pleasantly surprised about. DragonHeart has heart (thankfully), but it lacks inspiration and a clear reason to exist.

So, I guess, to really "hate on" DragonHeart is kind of fruitless. It's seriously harmless, but, unfortunately, completely forgettable, which is why I'm struggling to write a review of substance in the first place. Hopefully I'll like Dragonslayer more

+

__________________
Lists and Projects
Letterboxd

You must have a real good ear for music...from IMDB trivia:
I watched Dragonlayer last night which also has some interesting music score trivia at IMDB. Think I'll watch DragonHeart next, sticking with the dragon theme.

Had you seen DragonHeart before, ahwell? I can't imagine what it would be like watching that film for the first time now, without any nostalgia for it.

I was going to watch either DragonHeart or Dragonslayer next. Maybe I'll follow CR's lead and pull a double dragon*.

*-not the game haha.

Nope, I had never seen it, which probably adds another reason why I wasn’t a fan.

Whoa I had no idea!!! That’s so cool and it was a really good score!