Return of the King at 20

When the Lord of the Rings trilogy was first published in the 1950s, a void of almost 50 years followed, in which Tolkien’s colossal and much-loved works were deemed unfilmable. Until 2001, that is. Enter: Peter Jackson, auteur of low-budget splatter-comedies now fondly viewed as the formative works behind a master’s magnum opus.  

 

The pre-2000s was a time when overly enthusiastic talk of powerful rings, talking trees, re-forged swords and forgotten kings would’ve seen you firmly labelled a textbook nerd, advised not to advertise. But Jackson’s trilogy made it all cool again. With the release of The Fellowship of the Ring in 2001, audiences the world-over were transfixed, ensnared by the touching characters and breath-taking landscapes of the New Zealander’s homeland. Lost in the seemingly endless blue of Elijah Wood’s wide-eyed Frodo, audiences were hungry for more. By 2002, The Two Towers graced the big screen with the longest battle sequence in film history (clocking in at 39 minutes long), and only increased excitement among casual audiences, critics, and Tolkien die-hards alike. Here was an audience held firmly in the grip of a storyteller who knew exactly what he was doing. And with that came the crowning jewel: The Return of the King. The triumphant conclusion of 9 hours and 3 minutes’ worth of perseverance in what is probably the messiest of the three, but undoubtedly the most emotionally rewarding.  

 

Such praise is not unfounded, as audience satisfaction and commercial success were followed up with critical acclaim. The Academy relented, and The Return of the King won every one of the 11 Oscars it was nominated for. Yes, the Nerd film won Best Picture. Shockingly, there were no acting nominations, but the Academy rarely get everything right. To this day, it shares the record for the most Oscars ever won with Titanic and Ben-Hur, and it would take an enormous feat to surpass it, if such a thing in this age of cinema is possible (although, Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer might come close). 

 

Technically, the film is a marvel. The cinematographer, Andrew Lesnie, once again understood the assignment, creating a delicious concoction of gunmetal grit, oozing tarry blood, raging fire, and swathes of mud. The unfathomable scope of Middle-Earth is imagined in all its breath-taking glory – those sweeping camera movements are at a trilogy-high, as is the seamless marriage of ground-breaking CGI and practical effects. Yet perhaps one of the greatest gifts the trilogy has given the industry is its mastery of motion capture. Cutting-edge visual effects brought Andy Serkis’s iconic Gollum to life with ingenious authenticity on top of a mischievously spectacular performance by the now-king of mocap. Throw in flawless performances from just about everyone, exemplary prosthetic and costume design, and sheer visual trickery (forced perspective still confuses me), and you’ve got yourself a masterpiece.  

​

But it doesn’t stop there. Cate Blanchett’s seductively wise Galadriel reassures Frodo that “even the smallest person can change the course of the future”, which itself seems to be a philosophical gift Jackson and co. are bestowing on the viewer. Holding on to hope and love while stumbling through endless suffering as Frodo and Sam (Sean Astin) do is beyond admirable, and something, I think, we can all aspire to. Frankly, accusations of a lack of thematic depth are outrageous. 

Some of the best scenes in the film happen after the great battles are over and the characters we have come to know and love share intimate, touching moments with each other. One of the most welcome things when revisiting the trilogy and its third instalment in particular, is the true depiction of healthy masculinity. The male characters display love, loyalty, respect, and even weakness, but this never detracts from their strength, nobility, or masculinity – it only enhances it. One standout is Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), a noble, loving character of messianic kingliness, who arguably remains the best depiction of masculinity in popular culture to this day. It’s truly refreshing to see. 

​

The Lord of the Rings trilogy (and, particularly, The Return of the King) kickstarted a 21st Century fantasy

resurgence aided by the obsession-inducing Harry Potter franchise. Its impact on the film industry cannot be overstated. In a time of cinematic conservatism and disappointing third instalments (The Matrix Resolutions, Spider-Man 3, the Star Wars prequels generally), The Return of the King knocked it out of the park. Today, in a cinematic era of serialised sausage factory sequels and disparately linked projects under the pretence of a “universe”, a driven collective effort of this magnitude simply would not be possible. From the cast (Timothée Chalamet as Frodo, anyone?), to the crew, to the devoted director, it just wouldn’t be the same. 

 

While often mocked for its numerous endings, The Return of the King juggles numerous plot threads and weaves them into one big, beautiful tapestry. It is a joyous expression of reverence and passion – the lovechild of hard work and slavish dedication to Tolkien’s vision. Disorientating, exhilarating, and ethereal, this triumphant conclusion changed the course of cinema forever and reminds the industry that nothing is unfilmable. This film was a blockbuster back in 2003, it’s still a blockbuster today, and it will continue to be so for many years to come.