Dumb! I started getting feedback on the review from youall, and realized that people thought I didn't like the movie! Stupid me, I'd left out the main paragraph that says "this is terrific stuff! It's going to be a classic!" I'd been mostly talking to people who were already fans and wanted to know the picky details, and forgot that there are some readers who don't know what it's all about, or why its important. I added that and cut some other stuff, but not enough, the editor will still have to excise abt 100 words. I can't wait to see this movie again.
*** "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" is big. You knew that. J.R.R. Tolkien's monumental novel established a whole new genre of literature, and director Peter Jackson's three-part production works hard to honor it. The film series has its flaws, some of which originate in the novel (here I must bear the slings and arrows of outraged fans). Tolkien's work, for all its breathtaking scope, can be turgid and repetitive. There are novels that have more subtle characters, which would allow actors more room to shine. Sometimes the film actually improves Tolkien, as with last year's scene of the death of Boromir. In other cases the films fall short of the book, either because of the inherent limitations of the medium, or because of misguided efforts to make it more funny or action-packed. But the bottom line is: this is a great story, and Peter Jackson's production is worthy of it. Only one film reviewed this month, because this is the one you must see, if you want to see a classic when it's born. I'm thinking, of course, of the classic story, its insight into good and evil, temptation and mercy. But for others, this film is all about landmark technology. Astounding computer graphic, makeup, and miniature effects strut about like supermodels on a catwalk. And it's noisy--hoo boy, with the surround-sound, it's like being inside a washing machine. A Victorian poet spoke of "ignorant armies [that] clash by night." Now imagine that literalized, with the help of software that creates gazillions of little critters, each programmed to pick a fight with the nearest other critter, and each with different levels of weariness, impulsiveness, and intelligence. Push a button and a hundred thousand of these start whaling at each other. In the dark. In the rain. For a long, long time. If you're like me, after not much of this you start planning dinner and trying to remember where you parked the car. Be patient, the storyline will eventually resume. That's the problem; movies aren't made for people like me, but for people who are eager to see little critters pound each other at length. I'll buy a ticket only once (well, twice), but they'll buy three or twenty. Jackson hinted at his frustration in an interview. "I have to make the most successful film I can," he said, "both financially and artistically." It was clear that those aims aren't always in concert. He brightened when talking about the extended version of this film that will be out eventually on DVD. The extended version of the first film, "The Fellowship of the Ring," has just come out, and thirty-five restored minutes results in a movie that, paradoxically, feels shorter. Now the motivations make more sense; now you care about the characters. We'll have to wait a year to get the same insight into "The Two Towers." How does this film differ from the first? Apart from new special effects, not much, since all three were made simultaneously and out of sequence. Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn continues to tilt his beautiful face down like a Pieta, eyes turned inward and filled with stormclouds. It's a very expressive face, but in this film has only this one expression, and he needs someone to hold him down and tickle him for a half-hour. (Ladies: No, I don't know where you can sign up to volunteer.) Elijah Wood, with bulldog neck and enormous eyes, continues to evoke the Anderson fairy tale of "a dog with eyes as big as the round tower." He has a few more expressions than Viggo, and in this film gets believably testy with Sam, but remains somehow brittle and superficial in the role. Sean Astin is an intelligent, thoughtful actor who has studied the books closely, but Sam Gamgee just doesn't offer much complexity. He's the Pillsbury doughboy with a backpack. Gimli the dwarf, played by John Rhys-Davies, has been cranked up to supply more comic relief this time around, to the loss of its dignity. When, in the first film, he exclaims, "Nobody tosses a dwarf!" it backslapped the bizarre British joke sport of dwarf-tossing. In this film Gimli says to Aragorn, "Toss me," and he does. From that point, Rhys-Davies becomes this film's R2-D2. (And they have the same initials! Coincidence?) The series graduates most likely to succeed are Dominic Monaghan (Merry) and Billy Boyd (Pippin). They constitute a match made in Middle-Earth, a clicking of two whimsical, absurd senses of humor. They hope to team on projects in the old Peter Sellers mode, for which they will have to discover roots to ground their carefree, but ultralight, chemistry. Roots they had in this film, strapped as they were for hour after hour into a 15-foot-tall animatronic tree. Treebeard is one of the beloved characters of the second Tolkien book, and the episode of the Ents gives a languorous break in the novel's muscular action. Not till Treebeard appeared on the screen did I realize that this simply cannot work in a movie. The effects couldn't be better, but what Ents need is time, and that's what the production cannot give them. So we get little glimpses of Treebeard's world, out of pace with the rest of the rushing plot, yet not enough to establish their own gravity. I couldn't think of any way to solve this problem. The technical showpiece of the film, of course, is Gollum, a computer-generated character based on the movements and expressions of actor Andy Serkis. Serkis performed in a bodysuit studded with markers; he was then erased from the film, and replaced with a stylized version of himself as a grayish, depraved river hobbit. Perhaps feeling claustrophobic in this shadowy incarnation, Serkis knocks the role to the ground and throttles it. Gollum is an impressive effect, but even more so is the transformation of Theoden. The old king, under the baneful influence of Wormtongue, is walking dead. Gandalf perceives the hand of Saruman controlling him, and performs what any Catholic would recognize as, essentially, an exorcism. As Theoden reawakens, the makeup department shows us one idea of what we're looking for when we say, "I look for the resurrection of the dead." Looks good. A similar transformation occurs when Gandalf reveals himself to Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli as Gandalf the White. He stands above them in garments glistening, intensely white, as no fuller on earth could bleach them, while the three disciples shield their eyes. Wait a minute, I was thinking of the Eastern Orthodox icon of the Transfiguration. They look a lot alike. "The Two Towers" is real big, because beneath the cinematic trappings there's an older and grander story than many fans, or even cast and crew, perceive. Those who know the deeper story, the one that Tolkien loved, will find even more to think about, while those cranky critters scramble around in the rain. Video club: Enjoy teeny-weeny Elijah Wood, eight years old, in Barry Levinson's poignant, funny film about a Russian immigrant family in Baltimore, "Avalon" (1990). Here he's a Chihuahua with eyes as big as the round tower. I wish I'd thought to ask Elijah during the interview, "Young man, do you know the difference between 'can' and 'may'?" ******** Frederica Mathewes-Green www.frederica.com
