“The Return of the King”: The End is near
Review by David Ribbens
“The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King” met all the expectations that were created in “The Fellowship of the Ring”, and “The Two Towers”.
The 2002 release of the “Two Towers” left many of its viewers in an elevated state. In light of this elevated excitement it is a daunting task for “The Return of the King” to reach the previously set bar of standard. Many people excited for the final film of the trilogy went to view it with a greater anticipation than is fair to the producer of the film.
Peter Jackson, the director of “The Lord of the Rings” started this film series with the film called, “The Fellowship of the Ring”.
He continued his trilogy with “The Two Towers, and finally releasing in 2003 the final film, “The Return of the King.”
Basic Plot Detracts Not
“The Return of the King has a very basic plot for it being the final film of “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy.
Frodo and his companion Sam, both young hobbits, have been given the task to bring a special ring to a place called the Crack of Doom.
The Crack of Doom is guarded by evil forces who don’t want the ring to be destroyed.
It is interesting how such a basic plot can be turned into a film of upwards of three hours. One would think that a three hour movie with a base plot of traveling to a molten hole in the earth and dropping the ring in would have its fair share of boring and inactive sequences. However, Peter Jackson, in correlation with the actors, did an excellent job of maintaining interest.
Many viewers would describe “The Return of the King” as displaying no scene or even thought of plot boredom. This is a difficult thing to infect your audience with in light of the basic plot that I stated earlier.
Scene Jumping
One of the most troubling aspects of the film is the random scene changes.
Despite its simplicity, “The Return of the King” has a very well developed plot, but the director insists on scene jumping. Even the slightest inattentive viewer will get lost in the unnecessary flipping around from scene to scene and back again.
One of the most troubling aspects of the film is the random scene changes. .. the director insists on scene jumping
As a similar and perhaps familiar example is “The Pirates of the Caribbean” film which was organized in an identical way. I, along with most other movie critiques, will not hesitate to tell you that “The Pirates of the Caribbean” has a far less developed plot than that of “The Return of the King”.
However, the sporadic scene changes from one line of action to another are quite similar in both movies. In addition, “Pirates of the Caribbean” also has the same adventurous feel of the Lord of the Rings films. In addition, both films were inspired by their novel series. With so much in common it would seem so easy to categorize these films as nearly the same. However, upon further inspection it is clear to see that Pirates is not near the theatrical level of “The Return of the King”.
“The Return of the King” and “Pirates of the Caribbean” both appearing in the public eye at nearly the same time does add a competitive or comparative perspective. Although the beginning movies in the series are very important it is apparent that the final movie sets the standard of the entire trilogy.
“The Return of the King”, as mentioned earlier, had a high set bar to reach, and the Final “Pirates of the Caribbean” movie, “At Worlds End”, was not much lower.
Trouble with Trilogys
What is it that the audience is looking for in a final film of an action/ adventure trilogy?
I think the most important aspect of the final film in a trilogy in closure. The film needs to tie off all of the different sub stories in the plot, and bring the rest together into a culminating focal point. “The Return of the King” did just that. The suspenseful ending scene left nothing hinging, and answered all of our yearning questions, but still left the audience thirsting for more.
Along with tying down all aspects of the plot comes the continuation of themes and scenes from one movie in the trilogy to the next.
It is easy to see from the opening scene of “The Return of the King” that a viewer without knowledge of the preceding films will not comprehend what is taking place. “The Return of the King” made an attempt at revisiting old events in the newer movies. Had it been done effectively these intertwined concepts and themes would have generated a large story for the viewer and caused all of the films to blend together as one. It would be a lie to say that there was not an honest effort made, but because of the frequent scene switching as I mentioned earlier, many viewers became more disoriented by these attempts.
Although “The Return of the King” generally failed at these connections between films, there was a particular instance where the director achieved one of these connections. It was the first scene of the movie.
First of all the directors choice of opening scenes in “The Return of the King” and “The Two Towers” was very interesting to me. To put it into context the two films varied dramatically in the beginning.
The “Two Towers” started with a real “in your face” sequence where Gandalf, a good wizard who was helping Frodo and Sam on their mission, battled a mystical creature down a mountainside.
This is a much more active opening scene than “The Return of the King”.
“The Return of the King” is a more peaceful scene with far less background information given to the viewer. The actions in the first scene confirm my thought.
“The Return of the King” starts as a hobbit named Sméagol watches his friend fall into a pond while they were fishing together. His friend emerges from the water with a gold ring in his hand. Sméagol, who is overcome by evil at the sight of the ring, kills his friend so he can take it.
The Return of the King” is easily the best final movie out of any action/ adventure trilogy of this decade ..
Sméagol was a very active character in the first two films and without previous knowledge of the films, the viewer would not understand as the scene transitions to Sméagol in his current state of being.
The next few scenes picture Frodo and Sam at the edge of Mordor where “The Two Towers” film had ended off. It is easy to see that knowledge of the first two films in the trilogy is required to grasp all that is happening in the final, but as this can be confusing to some viewers; it is strengthening to those who have watched the first two films.
“The Return of the King” is easily the best final movie out of any action/ adventure trilogy of this decade at least.
For those who are willing to endure some moments of complication, this film will reward you with a nothing short of satisfactory ending to an outstanding trilogy. A lot of people already know this, but for those, like me who disregarded the excitement of the trilogy when it first came out, it is definitely a wise investment of your time.
The trilogy is exceptional as a whole as well, but it is how “The Return of the King” culminated this series that sets “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy apart from all the rest.
Review by David Ribbens
