Walking back from the Uptown Cinema last night, we talked about what makes The Return of the King, and in extension, the entire Lord of the Rings trilogy, work. Jim Henley's been pondering the same question in a way, making a case for how Tolkien and the inklings found more interest in people being good than people being bad. It's an intriguing idea, because it really does seem in recent media that the more interesting characters have been the villains.

But I think the movies work because of how they really highlight one of the books' main themes: the attraction of power and how power corrupts. In this third movie, it really takes shape in the madness of the steward of Gondor and how Aragorn is tested after the battle of Minas Tirith (does he release the army of the dead, even knowing that Sauron has more hordes behind the Black Gate, or does he continue to hold them bound to him, breaking his oath but possibly saving his people?). The response people have to this--Galadriel and Gandalf refusing to take the ring, Boromir trying to take it--make up the conflict of the movie, because throughout it all, the ring is a character, the lure of power personified.

Unlike the other two movies, I really didn't notice any absences (Nate does a great job of pointing them out and making a case for their return), although I look forward to watching the extended edition in a year. After three days of Lord of the Rings, I may have recovered enough to be able to enjoy it then.