They say that all good things must come to an end. It is unfortunate that movie franchises often end with a fizzling out rather than a grand finale. In fact, there is not one trilogy or series that doesn’t suffer a weak link, other than perhaps Indiana Jones, which is still debatable. With “The Matrix” sequels being so bad that they threaten to overshadow the original, it is nice to see the curse beaten for once.
Peter Jackson’s glorious conclusion to his masterful adaptation of “The Lord of the Rings” bows out gracefully with “The Return of the King.” What he has given in this final part is in fact better than the previous two chapters. A lot of this is the benefit of an actual conclusion. It was hard to give a final judgment on “Fellowship” or “Towers” without the conclusion.
“The Return of the King” starts out with a flashback to Smeagol’s (Andy Serkis, “The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers”) discovery of the ring and his fall into the creature that would become Gollum. While the opening is small when compared to that of “The Two Towers,” Jackson has done an excellent job creating a structural symmetry among the three films. Each film opens with a flashback that deals with the fall or descent into darkness.
The film then shifts to Frodo (Elijah Wood, “The Faculty”) and Sam (Sean Astin, “The Goonies”) following Gollum into Mordor. The ring is starting to affect Frodo more and more, and Gollum uses this to his advantage to come between the two hobbits. Then focus moves to Isengard, where Aragorn and Gandalf arrive to pick up Merry and Pippin as the Fellowship becomes whole once again. Attention is then turned to the threat on Gondor and to Aragorn’s acceptance of his destiny.
What works so well about this movie is how it plays into the previous events. A big complaint about “The Two Towers” was its splintered storylines jumping back and forth too often. After “Return of the King,” it is evident that this splintering was intentional. While there are still many broken groups of storylines here, they all feel like they are working together to help each other — quite the opposite of “Towers.” In the long run, that splintering was needed to emphasize the power of this third film.
The acting is top-notch, with Elijah Wood taking Frodo to depths of darkness that make you feel truly sorry for him. Viggo Mortenson steps up to be the king that Aragorn is meant to be. Even I would follow him into a hopeless battle. Ian McKellen gets far more screen time than in “Towers” and makes some brilliant battle plans. It becomes clear for many reasons that he has masterminded everything.
The real standout is Sean Astin’s Sam. With Frodo so deteriorated, audience sympathy falls onto Sam. Sam defines loyalty, as all his bravery comes from the promise he made to never leave Frodo. The way Sam takes on the gigantic spider Shelob to save poor Frodo represents the love and devotion he has for his friend. This is a lesson that more should be exposed to in this day and age.
As for the ending, the response to anyone who says it is too long can only be one thing: Shut up! This is not wrapping up a three-hour movie; it’s wrapping up a nine-hour movie. You cannot conclude something that long in three minutes. To do so would be a total injustice to all the characters of the film. It also comes back to the issue of symmetry. The first film took just as long to get started, so there is no reason the third should rush to an end.
Peter Jackson has created a classic that will be watched for decades to come and has established the standard before which all fantasy epics must kneel. Will there ever be a trilogy to beat this? I doubt it. Even one matching it seems highly unlikely. And so it comes to an end, at least until next fall’s extended edition. Here’s to hoping for a Jackson adaptation of “The Hobbit.”
Rating: A
