The Inside Scoop on Gaming

As is the case with many of you reading this the work of JRR Tolkien was my introduction to the fantasy genre and the impetus for a life long obsession that led me to, among other things: RPGs. Where I suspect that I differ from many of you is that I saw the movies long before I ever picked up the book. I'm talking about the old Rankin Bass Hobbit and Return of the King (the Ralph Bakshi version scared me too much to have a lasting impact until after I had read the trilogy). While these films inspired a love of Tolkien's work, and did a fairly decent job of telling a story in their own right, ultimately they all fell short of their goal. Peter Jackson's Fellowship of the Ring, part one of a promised trilogy, shares many of the strengths of the earlier adaptation but shares many of their flaws. To begin with Fellowship of the Ring is a good film. It has some very compelling characters and all of the main parts are acted very well but special note should be given to Ian McKellan who plays Gandalf and Ian Holm who plays a regrettably short part as Bilbo Baggins. The screen play is a very good mix of humor and drama. There is enough comic relief written into the script but is neither gratuitous nor annoying. The pacing is good and doesn't have the problem that many recent three hour films have had, where the stuff that occurs between action sequences is more or less pointless filler (or in some cases an attempt to give the movie the air of respectability denied to hack and slash action flicks). The filming is excellent and Mr. Jackson shows an admirable command of camera angles that just make everything look very cool. Production design also shows an admirable level of detail, and I believe that one could probably see this movie many times and still not pick up everything. I particularly liked Boromir's bracers with the white tree of Gondor. The score flows very well with the film and adds emotional grounding to scenes like the fall of Gandalf and Frodo's confrontation with the black riders. It is truly an exquisite piece of music and I would recommend it to any GMs looking for game music. This being said FotR has some problems. First of all there are a few wasted frames. For instance we see the exact same scene of Isildur holding the one ring two or three times. The special effects do not look as realistic as the newer Star Wars films or even Harry Potter, and they seem to be a bit overused. There are several scenes, which I won't mention because they do look very impressive if you don't know they're coming, where the budget of this film could have been reduced significantly were they toned down. Overall the Fellowship of the Ring is a surprisingly good fantasy film with a few flaws that would probably be overlooked or minimized were it not the bearer of a great deal of critical scrutiny due to its source material. The degree of the fidelity of the film to this source material is the next, and for many perhaps the crucial, question that must be answered in an evaluation of Fellowship of the Ring. Sadly FotR can't quite manage to be very faithful to Tolkien's actual words although it does try to stick close to the meaning and tone of this work. If you are a Tolkien purist who demands absolute adherence to every sentence of text you will probably leave the theater wanting Peter Jackson's blood. On the plus side everything looks right. The film brings many of the scenes described in detail by Tolkien to brilliant life, especially in Moria. The basic plot and progression of events is kept throughout most of the film. The changes are on the level of the individual scenes and while many classic Tolkien scenes such as Bilbo's farewell address and Gandalf's battle with the Balrog are kept more or less intact, many are either mangled beyond recognition (Frodo's escape from the ford) or removed all together (Tom Bombadil). The order of some events is changed (Gandalf no longer frees himself from Isengard before Frodo leaves the shire) and time is significantly condensed particularly in the case of the time between when Frodo learns that his ring is the One and when he embarks for Rivendell. The end is also completely different and incorporates elements from the first chapter of the Two Towers. There are also very few of Tolkien's actual words in the movie. Most of the dialogue is the work of the screen writers although they adapted some of the more salient quotes and threw in the names of the chapters from the book at odd places and trying to pick them all out could be amusing for Tolkien aficionados. Some of the characterizations are also off particularly Gandalf, who seems far less sure of himself and his choices then he should be, and Elrond, who in the film seems to still be nursing resentment towards Isildur for not destroying the ring. The movie also doesn't have the same sense of history that the books did, despite the overuse of flashbacks and the introductory narration. What the movie does very well however is capture the tone of the book. Despite some out of character actions the characters, with the exception of Elrond, are faithful to Tolkien's original conception. Tolkien's morality and themes remain intact. Most importantly this movie does for me what Rankin Bass did all those years ago: it tells a fantastic story and makes me want to read Tolkien. Hopefully this new film, with all its flaws will inspire another generation of Tolkien fanatics to criticize the next attempt to bring this classic saga into a new medium.

Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring
Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring Capsule Review by JW Carroll on 19/12/01 Style: 3 (Average) Substance: 3 (Average) This movie is good so you won't mind that its a horrible adaptation of the book. Really! Product: Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring Author: Director Peter Jackson Category: Movie Company/Publisher: New Line Cinema Line: Cost: Page count: n/a Year published: 2001 ISBN: SKU: Comp copy?: no Capsule Review by JW Carroll on 19/12/01 Genre tags: Fantasy	As is the case with many of you reading this the work of JRR Tolkien was my introduction to the fantasy genre and the impetus for a life long obsession that led me to, among other things: RPGs. Where I suspect that I differ from many of you is that I saw the movies long before I ever picked up the book. I'm talking about the old Rankin Bass Hobbit and Return of the King (the Ralph Bakshi version scared me too much to have a lasting impact until after I had read the trilogy). While these films inspired a love of Tolkien's work, and did a fairly decent job of telling a story in their own right, ultimately they all fell short of their goal. Peter Jackson's Fellowship of the Ring, part one of a promised trilogy, shares many of the strengths of the earlier adaptation but shares many of their flaws. To begin with Fellowship of the Ring is a good film. It has some very compelling characters and all of the main parts are acted very well but special note should be given to Ian McKellan who plays Gandalf and Ian Holm who plays a regrettably short part as Bilbo Baggins. The screen play is a very good mix of humor and drama. There is enough comic relief written into the script but is neither gratuitous nor annoying. The pacing is good and doesn't have the problem that many recent three hour films have had, where the stuff that occurs between action sequences is more or less pointless filler (or in some cases an attempt to give the movie the air of respectability denied to hack and slash action flicks). The filming is excellent and Mr. Jackson shows an admirable command of camera angles that just make everything look very cool. Production design also shows an admirable level of detail, and I believe that one could probably see this movie many times and still not pick up everything. I particularly liked Boromir's bracers with the white tree of Gondor. The score flows very well with the film and adds emotional grounding to scenes like the fall of Gandalf and Frodo's confrontation with the black riders. It is truly an exquisite piece of music and I would recommend it to any GMs looking for game music. This being said FotR has some problems. First of all there are a few wasted frames. For instance we see the exact same scene of Isildur holding the one ring two or three times. The special effects do not look as realistic as the newer Star Wars films or even Harry Potter, and they seem to be a bit overused. There are several scenes, which I won't mention because they do look very impressive if you don't know they're coming, where the budget of this film could have been reduced significantly were they toned down. Overall the Fellowship of the Ring is a surprisingly good fantasy film with a few flaws that would probably be overlooked or minimized were it not the bearer of a great deal of critical scrutiny due to its source material. The degree of the fidelity of the film to this source material is the next, and for many perhaps the crucial, question that must be answered in an evaluation of Fellowship of the Ring. Sadly FotR can't quite manage to be very faithful to Tolkien's actual words although it does try to stick close to the meaning and tone of this work. If you are a Tolkien purist who demands absolute adherence to every sentence of text you will probably leave the theater wanting Peter Jackson's blood. On the plus side everything looks right. The film brings many of the scenes described in detail by Tolkien to brilliant life, especially in Moria. The basic plot and progression of events is kept throughout most of the film. The changes are on the level of the individual scenes and while many classic Tolkien scenes such as Bilbo's farewell address and Gandalf's battle with the Balrog are kept more or less intact, many are either mangled beyond recognition (Frodo's escape from the ford) or removed all together (Tom Bombadil). The order of some events is changed (Gandalf no longer frees himself from Isengard before Frodo leaves the shire) and time is significantly condensed particularly in the case of the time between when Frodo learns that his ring is the One and when he embarks for Rivendell. The end is also completely different and incorporates elements from the first chapter of the Two Towers. There are also very few of Tolkien's actual words in the movie. Most of the dialogue is the work of the screen writers although they adapted some of the more salient quotes and threw in the names of the chapters from the book at odd places and trying to pick them all out could be amusing for Tolkien aficionados. Some of the characterizations are also off particularly Gandalf, who seems far less sure of himself and his choices then he should be, and Elrond, who in the film seems to still be nursing resentment towards Isildur for not destroying the ring. The movie also doesn't have the same sense of history that the books did, despite the overuse of flashbacks and the introductory narration. What the movie does very well however is capture the tone of the book. Despite some out of character actions the characters, with the exception of Elrond, are faithful to Tolkien's original conception. Tolkien's morality and themes remain intact. Most importantly this movie does for me what Rankin Bass did all those years ago: it tells a fantastic story and makes me want to read Tolkien. Hopefully this new film, with all its flaws will inspire another generation of Tolkien fanatics to criticize the next attempt to bring this classic saga into a new medium.

Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring