In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.


It's rah-rah time!

Disclaimer: the following views are only my personal opinion.

I'm sorry, but Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King just didn't do anything for me. I don't believe that adaptations should be faithful to its source. In fact, all filmmakers know that a screenwriter who is adapting any source to screen owes nothing to the source itself. But LOTR3 just glossed over too much. Guess what? I don't even have to have read the trilogy to know that.

(This commentary bears no significance to the Tolkien's works, but to the films themselves.)

Let's not talk about what scenes should've been added in and what scene should've been cut. Let's talk about the truth behind the story. All stories, especially those produced in the big-budget Hollywood world, are about the characters involved, no matter the landscape, time period, culture, global events, crises, etc. No characters, no story, no show. Period.

So we have established that every movie made in the commercial world is definitely about characters. LOTR3 has established characters from LOTR1, such as Frodo Baggins, Sam Gamgee, Gandulf, and Aragorn. However, if the movie is only about these characters, then why begin any attempt to introduce characters like Legolas, Gimli, Elrond and others? I don't mind if they were introduced lightly and the characters remain simply part of the world inhabited by the hobbits. But they have been introduced and a perceived depth of character had also been established. When you get that far, you must finish with the characters. They are no longer there to be part of the scenary. They become highly integral to the story.

Truth to be said, besides fighting side-by-side with Aragorn, what do the characters of Legolas and Gimli do for the story? For Legolas, show of panache? A symbol of undying justice without repayment? If a character in the story is simply a symbol of an ideal, I, and many others, say that it's a lousy damned excused. As for Gimli, he was more a joke than anything else. "You have my axe," says he. "You have my ass," says me. I don't mind lending Gimli my end because he didn't have one.

Okay, now let's forget about how hollow these characters are. Let's talk about character consistencies. Elrond, the Lord of the Elves, has been adamant against letting Arwen reunite with Aragorn. Sensible. We have established his character to be a tight-arsed conservative who believes in keeping his line 'pure', according to 'ancient elven lore'. In the end, after much persuasion on Arwen's part, he relents, right? I'm still cool with this. But having him cry at the reunion itself is just too much. Why the hell is he crying? Even though he has relented, the writers must build precedence/premise leading up to his tearful exhibit. I have no problems with the crying, actually. I have problems with the missing parts that lead up to that crying. How has his hardened character move from tough-as-nails-ruler to sobbing-emotional-father?

Characters don't change so easily. If they did, they would have changed long ago, or at least early into the story. And if that happened, how much less story we have left to tell! The filmgoer must see character change. Remember: stories are always about people - their journey, their beliefs and their change. No change, no character, no story, no show. Period.

Don't tell me that this is not a character movie. All stories are about the characters. Just how much character is ranked on whether or not it has a character-driven plot or an action-driven plot. Ultimately, action itself is still driven by characters.

I'm not totally disappointed with LOTR3. I just think that the storyline build for the movie is like this: This happens, that happens, so this has to happen. Nothing more. Exposition is the worst possible excuse for putting in a scene in a movie, much less a whole film on its own.

Having said all that, I do actually like the visual and sound effects in this work. I have to hand it to the crew involved for the effort to make this film at least a visual success, if anything at all. To say that the film is not entertaining would be untrue. Yet, for those who are looking for stories with more truth in them, it would bid you well to read Tolkien's trilogy.

Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam.