The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

Director: Peter Jackson

Cast: Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen, Liv Tyler, Viggo Mortensen

Have I Seen it Before: I expressed during my review for The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002) that I’m not entirely sure if I’ve seen anything beyond The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001), which I have a very clear memory of seeing during its theatrical run. With The Two Towers, that was largely because I thought the middle-part of Middle Earth just dragged through its massive runtime with nothing but incident to recommend it, but here…?

Did I Like It: Here, I’m not sure I’ve seen this one before because after nearly its nearly 4 1/2 hours runtime, I actually kind of sort of liked it?

I know, I was as surprised as anyone else…

I always thought that my lack of enjoyment for the series in the past had stemmed from the fact that I had never read the original Tolkien text. Before this viewing, I did just that. Maybe that helped? Hard to tell.

Yes, there are stretches where I feel like both Tolkien and Jackson are content to spin their wheels while a conclusion to the saga looms (willfully?) just beyond their reach, but once things finally move on, the story takes on a great poignancy. That might have been predictable, as I’ve often expressed my antipathy to the series largely stems from my essential Hobbit-ness. The fact that I actually enjoy scenes set in the Shire a great deal, and can never quite understand why anyone would leave. Once things return to Hobbiton, I’m having a good time again.

But then everyone decides to take the last boat out of Rivendell* and I’m still left scratching my head. Why leave? Thus, I’ve come full circle.

*Which I could hear a thousand time—and probably did—and each time think they’re saying “Riverdale” and I keep thinking of, well, not the TV show but the actual Archie comics. I come to these movies (and the story) differently.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

Director: Peter Jackson

Cast: Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen, Liv Tyler, Viggo Mortensen

Have I Seen it Before: Sure? I eschewed everything after The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) during their theatrical run, but having been married to a dyed-in-the-wool Tolkienite for ten years, I’m sure I must have sit through it at some point.

Did I Like It: That’s not exactly the most upbeat note to begin a review on, no? The middle part of movie trilogies have a problem. They are all noise and incident, serving mainly as connective tissue between the stirring opening and the rousing conclusion. Even Star Wars - Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back (1980), for all of its strengths is largely an assembly of connections, topped with a surprise ending that hasn’t really been a surprise to anyone in over 40 years. It might be controversial to say, but aside from the freeway sequence, I don’t think The Matrix Reloaded (2003) had much that happened in at all. Even Back to the Future - Part II (1989) stands as an incomplete story, but I enjoy that world and characters so much, that it fails to diminish my enjoyment of the film even a little bit.

And I think that’s the standard which dictates how much someone will enjoy the part two of a trilogy. The Tolkien cycle never has and, at this point, likely never will hit me on the same level as it does the most of you. Thus, this becomes my least favorite in the series. This will seem vaguely sacrilegious to some, mainly my wife who counts this as her favorite in the series. She’s probably reading this now and shaking her head, even if she’s not surprised by the judgment. Hi, honey. We’ll get to The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) here in a minute. I love you.

Anyway, the main meat of Gollum’s (Andy Serkis) contributions to the story are here, but aside from that, everyone seems mainly consumed with battles that aren’t the real battles they will have to deal with in the next film.

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

Director: Peter Jackson

Cast: Elijah Wood, Ian McKellan, Liv Tyler, Viggo Mortensen

Have I Seen it Before: Sure. Hell, I was there on opening weekend. That was mainly because there wasn’t much else to do on that particular Friday night. If you happened to be in that particular auditorium, I was the one who laughed when Frodo (Wood) used the alias Mr. Underhill.

But that was only because it was the same alias Chevy Chase used at the country club in Fletch (1985).

Yes, I was that guy. It’s nice to see you again. I sure hope I didn’t ruin the movie for you.

Did I Like It: Look, I’m not the guy for Tolkien. Yes, I’ve read the books, but only recently. I’m not much for world building for the sake of world building, thus the Middle Earth canon and most of high fantasy just misses me.

But then again, this might very well be my favorite of all the Peter Jackson Tolkien films. I think that’s mainly because, for all of the sturm and drang that accompanies these stories, I always feel the proceedings lose something imminently pleasant when they leave the shire. I want to stay there and be among the hobbits. I’m not much for farming, but a good meal, and enough peace and quiet to write a book or seven suits me just fine. These adventures we keep getting dragged on run just a bit too long, and searches for far too many endings than one story ought to hold. Yes, the pictures are pretty. Yes, the actors play their parts well. Yes, the music is stirring. But I think I’ll stay here if it’s all the same to you.

Oh, you know what? It’s become abundantly clear I’m just Bilbo. That’s why this all hits a little bit different for me. I’m Bilbo. Everyone else can carry on. I’ll see you all in the third movie.

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies (2014)

Director: Peter Jackson

Cast: Ian McKellan, Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Luke Evans

Have I Seen it Before: No. This one Lora and I are sure of. After shrugging our way through The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013), there may have been some desire to catch the final Middle-Earth feature film (especially from Lora, the actual Tolkien fan in the house), but somehow not a lot of followthrough.

Did I Like It: Almost. The run-time is the shortest of any movie Jackson has done since The Frighteners (1996)*. That helps a lot.

However.

Smaug is dispatched in the first reel of this movie. Doesn’t that mean that the story of The Hobbit is done. Sure, Jackson could fill the return to the Shire and the consternation over the fate of the gold under the mountain for forty-five minutes, but shouldn’t we be heading out of the theater before sundown at this point?

I truly have underestimated the man’s ability—nay, pathological need—to pad things out. 

And by the end, things are dispatched with such ruthless speed, I can’t help but wonder if the slightly diminishing returns mandated some changes in the Jackson working style. Evangeline Lilly (little known fact: not played by Liv Tyler) and her love affair with a dwarf is ended with none of the pathos from the LOTR trilogy it was so thoroughly trying to ape.

It’s difficult for me to forgive a fueling sense of nostalgia for a film series I didn’t love to begins with.

Also, which five armies are we talking about here. One, dwarves. Two, men. Three, orcs. Four, elves.

Five… Five? Anyone? Gandalf (McKellan) and a handful of other LOTR characters, who spend the majority of the movie inevitably failing in their goals to forestall something we already know will happen? Bilbo alone (Freeman)? Legolas (Orlando Bloom), who still somehow appears in the film? Are we the viewers—and perhaps, more appropriately, the fans—the fifth army? I can’t readily come up with a more befuddling title for a film, mainly because I’m distracting myself with still shaking my head over this one.

*I’ve now gone two-for-three on referring to The Frighteners in my review of Hobbit films. Maybe it’s time to re-watch The Frighteners…

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Director: Peter Jackson

Cast: Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Benedict Cumberbatch

Have I Seen it Before: …yes? This is an ongoing debate in my house. We definitely remember going to see The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012) in the theater, but I couldn’t honestly say whether my wife and I have ever seen this one.

Did I Like It: Which should tell you something.

Second movies are tricky, especially where the trilogy has any degree of planning. Star Wars - Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980) can stand on its own for the most part, but as the years go by, I’m extremely convinced Lucas had no plan as he proceeded, especially for the original trilogy. I might like Back to the Future - Part II (1989) just fine, but plenty of people view it as only part of a movie, and that’s a reasonable criticism to levy.

But when the middle part of the film is only supposed to comprise the middle portion of an entire novel? How can such a film not feel almost entirely of a second act, with the proceedings being nothing more than a cavalcade of incident rushing forth in anticipation of a catharsis that—at least theatrically—wouldn’t come for another year?

For a true analysis of how Jackson attempts to accomplish that, you might just have to wait for my review of The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies (2014). There’s some fast dealing here. Fan service pads out the runtime*, forcing Legolas (Orlando Bloom, looking ten years older, despite being sixty years younger, but don’t tell anyone) into a story he didn’t exist in before. We are stuck with a cliffhanger for cliffhangers sake, made all the more strange by…

No. You know what? You will have to wait for my review of The Battle of the Five Armies. How does it feel, Peter Jackson? How does it feel?

*Jackson actually exhibits some restraint with the runtime in this series, as each film clocks in at under three hours, but what happened, man? The Frighteners (1996) was under 2 hours. You have the ability to do this!