More about this DVD  •  DVD Info  •  Movie Main Page  •  Message Board

These are books of epic proportions. Tolkien had created vast and complex interconnected cultures of whimsical and mystical creatures. The author invented language (he was an Oxford philologist) and expressed grand adventures in prose, rhyme, and song. He wove an intricate tapestry of topography and mythology. It was easy to become immersed in his tale of Middle Earth, set at a time that preceded the age of man.

The Hobbit introduces us to Bilbo Baggins. Like his fellow Hobbits, he is not very tall, perhaps half the height of a typical man. Hobbits are easily differentiated from dwarves by the thick crop of hair upon their heads and upon the tops of their bare, leathery feet; they are peaceful creatures until they are angered. Baggins is visited in his warm and comfortable Hobbit hole by Gandalf the Wizard and thirteen dwarf companions. Gandalf recruits Baggins to act as a thief on their expedition to retrieve a treasure amassed by Smaug the Dragon. Honest and decent, Baggins is an odd choice for the role, but he reluctantly allows himself to be drawn into the adventure.

Baggins travels away from his peaceful little shire to meet all forms of peoples and creatures. And he quite inadvertently comes to possess a very special ring, one that was forged in the fires of Mount Doom by the black arts and that holds unspeakable power to corrupt and - in the wrong hands - to conquer and dominate. He and his little band will ultimately triumph, recover the treasure and, for the most part, survive great obstacles. The ring will become an odd trinket to be displayed in a glass case on Baggins' mantelpiece. Tolkien's book, originally intended for children, is rich with mythological history, intricate plotting, and imaginative dialog. Its appeal transcends age and establishes the premise for the grander adventure of the Ring Trilogy.

Frodo Baggins has inherited the ring from his uncle Bilbo. Now he, too, is visited by the great wizard, Gandalf. It seems that the ring possesses more than the ability to make its wearer invisible; it is imbued with a power that will allow its wearer to rule all of Middle Earth. But the ring's wicked origin would reduce the planet to a living hell should it fall into the hands of evil. And evil is personified by the dark wizard, Sauron, who has come to learn of the ring's recovery. To save the planet from destruction, the ring must itself be destroyed. This can only be accomplished by returning it to the fires in which it was forged, deep in the inhospitable land of Mordor. But the ring's destruction will also herald the end of the mystical creatures of Middle Earth; wizards and elves will perish. Mortal man will come to dominate the planet. So we learn that The Lord of the Rings is a tale of great sacrifice: the willing end of culturally rich and magical societies as ultimate power is destroyed to save the planet.

Against the forces of good rises Sauron the Great, the Lord of the Rings. Sauron unleashes horrendous creatures in his quest to recover the ruling ring. As Frodo and his loyal allies journey to Mount Doom, deep within Sauron's domain, they must battle the merciless Ring Wraiths and Orcs sent to destroy them. Frodo's Hobbit companions Samwise, Merry, and Pippin, are aided by both man and elf as Gandalf uses all his skills to ward off Sauron's attacks. The depth and complexity of these books are impossible to express in the context of this review, and that complexity is precisely the challenge faced by any filmmaker who hopes to bring this grand epic to the screen.

In 1978, director Ralph Bakshi, who earned an instant reputation with his controversial, X-rated Fritz The Cat several years earlier, attempted to take on this monumental challenge. He was very bold. Armed with a ten million dollar budget, Bakshi discarded The Hobbit and divided the Lord of the Rings into two stories to be told in two animated motion pictures, the first of which to be called The Lord of the Rings. He filmed his actors, predominantly in costume; then, he processed the film in a number of imaginative ways to create animation. The principal characters were rotoscoped; animation was drawn on their filmed images. Some of the characters were processed photographically to create an unworldly appearance. Some are in silhouette. The object was to create convincing and natural motion for characters that were clearly beyond our experiences.

To a certain extent, Bakshi was successful. The subtle and quirky mannerisms of normal movement were believably conveyed. But the axiom of less is more fell to Bakshi's direction, for the actors always seem to be fidgeting, even in simple conversation. And Bakshi's screenwriters, Peter S. Beagle and Chris Conkling, were forced to distill the first two of Tolkien's lengthy books into a screenplay of two and a quarter hours duration. They had to all but discard the remarkable richness of Middle Earth and reduce the plot to an action / adventure piece. What we're left with is a series of conflicts and action set pieces as the characters and creatures are introduced to the audience.

I'm forced to assume that the studio ultimately considered the film a failure, despite what my research seems to indicate: that the film earned about seven times it budget worldwide. So regardless of the participation of the voice talents of such familiar names as John Hurt (Aragorn) and Anthony Daniels (Legolas), the second film was never made. This left our little heroes in a rather unsatisfying situation, having reached Mordor and surrounded on all sides by Sauron's evil minions. In stepped producers / directors Jules Bass and Arthur Rankin Jr. to fill the gaps left by Bakshi. They decided to complete Tolkien's epic by creating two made-for-television animations: The Hobbit; and, The Return of the King.

Limited motion animation and produced off-shore, these two productions further reduced the scope of Tolkien's vision to children's entertainment, replete with sugary songs by Glen Yarbrough that tend to stop the action (such as it is) dead in its tracks. Having already sacrificed the richness of detail within Tolkien's Middle Earth, these two films further reduce the requirements for audience IQ. At least Bakshi's interpretation of Middle Earth have some edginess and some bite; The Hobbit and The Return of the King are toothless.

Video: How Does The Disc Look?

Despite some early rumors to the contrary, The Lord of the Rings is shown in anamorphic video and preserves its theatrical aspect ratio of 1.85:1. Colors are just a tad muted, but it's not clear that this might have been the director's artistic decision. Clearly, there are many dark scenes for night and shadow are psychologically foreboding. Shadow detail is quite fine, and brightness and contrast are quite good. There is a commendable level of detail without intrusive edge artifacts. Dirt is visible on the film elements and on some of the animation cells, but not to the extent that it becomes a distraction. Compression artifacts are not a problem.

The Hobbit and The Return of the King are shown in 1.33:1 fullscreen, just as they were intended to be seen. In fact, no effort was made to camouflage the fades to and from black where commercials were to have been inserted. Colors are much more dominant in these little films, corresponding to the more cheerful approach of the filmmakers. Once again, brightness, contrast, and shadow detail are fine. Detail is quite good as well, again without intrusive edge artifacts. However, some mosquito noise runs through both films and can be seen around the black lines that define the features in each character's face, particularly in close-up.

Audio: How Does the Disc Sound?

The Lord of the Rings is presented in Dolby Digital 2.0 surround, but sounds like stereo, as I noticed no surround effects. Bass is modest, but some thunder was conveyed with authority. Dialog remains clear throughout. Leonard Rosenman's orchestral score seems a bit vague, lacking screen specificity. Observant viewers who are also Star Trek fans will recognize themes that will be used in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. The orchestra sounds a bit pinched, suffering from some bandwidth limitations and spatial compression. Sound effects suffer from some distortion and amplitude compression.

There is a second audio track in French. This disc is supported by subtitles in English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Mandarin Chinese, Thai, Korean, and Japanese. There are also English Closed Captions.

The Hobbit and The Return of the King are both monaural. The soundstage is one-dimensional and adds to the claustrophobia of these two productions. Glen Yarbrough's recordings have great presence, not necessarily an advantage. There is no deep bass, nor is there a pleasing bandwidth. Sound effects are subdued. The looped dialog, however, is very finely recorded.

These discs are supported by subtitles in English, French, and Spanish. Once again, there are English Closed Captions.

Supplements: What Goodies Are There?

The Lord of the Rings offers few extras. Cast & Crew lists thirteen of the principals, but offers only selected filmographies for the producer and the director. J.R.R. Tolkien - Biography includes only eight bullets on two screens. And Of Elves and Other Races offers a brief explanation of six of the beings found in Middle Earth. There are thirty-eight chapter stops.

Both The Hobbit and The Return of the King share similar limited supplements. Cast & Crew lists eleven of the principals, but offers only selected filmographies for the producers / directors. J.R.R. Tolkien - Facts & Trivia again includes only eight bullets on two screens. On The Hobbit, Of Hobbits offers two text screens that describe the participation of Bilbo and Frodo, something we already know from the film. Similarly, on The Return of the King, Of Men and Wizards describes their participation. The Hobbit has twenty-five chapter stops; The Return of the King, thirty (the snapper case shows thirty- eight).

Parting Thoughts