![]() ![]() Yes, they will be adrift during the early passages of the film's 200 minutes, but to be adrift occasionally during this nine-hour saga comes with the territory Tolkien's story is so sweeping and Jackson includes so much of it that only devoted students of the Ring can be sure they understand every character, relationship and plot point. "Return of the King" is such a crowning achievement, such a visionary use of all the tools of special effects, such a pure spectacle, that it can be enjoyed even by those who have not seen the first two films. Still, Jackson's achievement cannot be denied. The epic fantasy has displaced real contemporary concerns, and audiences are much more interested in Middle Earth than in the world they inhabit. It is a melancholy fact that while the visionaries of a generation ago, like Coppola with " Apocalypse Now," tried frankly to make films of great consequence, an equally ambitious director like Peter Jackson is aiming more for popular success. The story is just a little too silly to carry the emotional weight of a masterpiece. That it falls a little shy of greatness is perhaps inevitable. This is the best of the three, redeems the earlier meandering, and certifies the "Ring" trilogy as a work of bold ambition at a time of cinematic timidity. But "Return of the King" dispatches its characters to their destinies with a grand and eloquent confidence. The second film was inconclusive, and lost its way in the midst of spectacle. I admire it more as a whole than in its parts. At last the full arc is visible, and the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy comes into final focus.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |