Chalomumbai review of LOTR
Karan Anshuman and Udita Jhunjhunwala
Chalo Mumbai

Dir: Peter Jackson
Cast: Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen, Sean Bean, Ian Holm

The film, they say, is never as good as the book. With the screen adaptation of J R R Tolkien's The Lord of The Rings though, it's a close contest, or so say the fans. The world seems to be divided into the haves and have-nots - those that have read The Lord of the Rings and those who have not read it. And the reactions of both to the film were interestingly different. So here we have two reviews - one by a have and the other by a have not.

By Karan Anshuman
Rating: **** 1/2

J R R TOLKIEN, in his famous foreword to The Lord of the Rings, mentions that the one chief complaint of the 1137-page book's fans is this: it's too short. Voted as the book of the century, by several esteemed lists, Tolkien's work is the very definition, the basis, of twentieth century fantasy. The secret of the book's charm lies in its intricacies and comprehensiveness. So much so, that it took almost half a century for someone (in the form of Peter Jackson) to even attempt to recreate the magic on film.

What was Jackson thinking when he set out to achieve this? Did he have an inkling of the intolerance levels of Tolkien's devoted enthusiasts? Could he sense that if his film went wrong, if there wasn't justice done to the text, then he would be written off as one of the biggest failures in Hollywood history?

And how do you justify a book of this sort, where everything is left to the imagination. Where the author has forged entire worlds, entire races of creatures, and an entire parallel universe on a rickety old postwar typewriter?

Two seventy million dollars, two years of filming and the effort of 2400 cast and crewmembers later, the world gets an opportunity to glimpse into Tolkien's imagination. Did the 100 million people who have read the book share Jackson's vision of it? Hell yes. The film is brilliant.

Hobbiton of the Shire, the timeless Elven sanctuary of Rivendell, Saruman's refuge-turned-Uruk Hai producing workshop, the unending and unfathomable caverns of Moria, the mystic woods of Lothlórien have been worked upon with astonishing attention to detail using a combination of CG and real sets of an unsurpassed scale (making a movie like The Matrix look like a two-bit video game.) This is art direction to die for. Casting and subsequently performances are near perfect. If Liv Tyler can impress as Arwen, you can imagine how the flawless Ian McKellen is Gandalf. The rest of the cast from Elijah Wood as Frodo to Cate Blanchett as Lady Galadriel is as convincing as one might have imagined. Only, personally I'd thought Aragorn to be grimmer and Elrond more wizened.

But surely it can't be perfect? No certainly not. The introduction is below expectation; Sauron is disappointingly unintimidating in his first avatar. Minor characters like Tom Bombadil fail to find a place in the movie. Jackson, in the screenplay, has even moved the plot around a bit, and Arwen is solely responsible for rescuing a poisoned Frodo, when it really was Glorfindel (omitted again). And yet, the Flight to the Ford with the Ringwraiths chasing Arwen is my favorite scene in the movie (Khazad-Dûm coming in a close second - remind yourself to keep breathing through these) and so makes up for any divergence from the plot. The film, you see, makes no excuses.

Rather than the grandeur of it all, it's the little things that make the movie if you are looking at it from the point of view of someone who has read the book. The hairy hobbit-feet, the build-up towards the revelation of the Balrog, the multi-layered storytelling through the film's first-rate editing, and the fact that almost every piece of dialogue is right out of the book make it a balanced film true to the text.

The Fellowship of the Ring, like the book, ends too quickly (only 178 minutes). And while you could easily turn the page and start with The Two Towers without blinking, you will have to wait until next year, unfortunately, for the film's sequel.

There's a second review alongside for people who haven't read the book, for people who are practical and objective about this whole LOTR frenzy. Well, if you are one of them, despite the slight discrepancy in length, I'd suggest you read the book, instead of that review.

Karan started reading the Lord of The Rings books at 16. He has read them thrice since but is still not ready to lend them to Udita.

By Udita Jhunjhunwala
Rating: ****

Let me say it up-front, I have not read The Lord of The Rings, and in this day and age, that is something to be whispered. Still, for the benefit of those who have read it, let them know this before they read on, and for the benefit of those who, like me, are likely to be relegated to the Mount of Doom by Tolkien fans, this may be reassuring information.

Thirteen Oscar nominations, the greatest book of the century, a cult following, a budget that could wipe out the national debt of a small developing country, a cast and credit list so long it could be the entire population of a small developing country. Director Peter Jackson must be a huge Tolkien fan - you can sense it in the care taken with the film, in the detailing, in the indulgence and pace with which the story unravels itself.

And what is the story? That's the tricky part. There are so many characters and strange names that you almost wish for a glossary when you enter the theatre. But basically it is the story of good and evil, of purity and avarice, of friendship, loyalty, and I suspect, many illegal substances. Those hobbits sure like their pipes!

Set in Middle-earth, the dark lord Sauron is getting stronger and the only thing standing between him and complete annihilation of the world is a ring. This powerful piece of metal has fallen into the hands of Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) who, along with his hobbit friends Sam, Merry and Pippin and the fellowship of the ring - Gimli the dwarf, Aragorn, Boromir and Legolas, guided by the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen) - is headed towards the Mount of Doom to destroy the Ring. But the corrupted Saruman's (Christopher Lee) vile creatures, the Uruk-Hai, are in swift pursuit of the ring bearers.

The story doesn't offer much more than this simple plot. But the film, based so closely on the book, is a playground for the imagination. The fantasy worlds created by Tolkien and visualised by Jackson's team make this film is a triumph of art direction, special effects, costume, locations and performances. The four stars are an acknowledgement of the sum of the parts.

Sadly, for those who have not read the books, the film is confusing, but it certainly makes you want to read them before the second part comes out at the end of the year.

Udita Jhunjhunwala has never read the LOTR but hopes to borrow Karan's copy soon