Born of Hope

I'd heard of this film but delayed getting round to watching it . Don't get me wrong I was totally blown away by Jackson's LOTR trilogy when they came out , especially when I wasn't expecting much more than rather average entertainment but we are talking about a film trilogy that came out ten years ago and in the mean time Jackson lost his magic touch . Let's be honest whatever the technical merits of THE HOBBIT it's a cynical marketing franchise that doesn't have to be a trilogy and when watching last year's release I was constantly reminded of how the plot was composed of characters walking along Middle Earth for ten minutes , getting captured , escaping , walking along Middle Earth for ten minutes , getting captured , escaping , walking along ... and you're left with the feeling you're merely watching out takes from the first trilogy and one wonders if this cynicism might actually damage the reputation of the original series . If Jackson can't capture the magic of the first trilogy then what hope for a bunch of enthusiastic amateurs ?

I'll give these enthusiastic amateurs great credit . This is a definite labour of love and from the outset the production team capture the look , the feel and most importantly of all the breath taking beauty of the series from 2001-2003 , so much so that I had to constantly remind myself this wasn't produced by New Line Cinema with Jackson at the helm such was the authenticity of the costumes , make ups and perhaps most of all the music which wasn't by Howard Shore . What I also liked was the distinct lack of CGI . Okay there is a scene with a CGI monster which isn't too impressive but at least the Orcs are extras in make up . Compare this with the constant use of it in THE HOBBIT where the audience have to endure umpteen set pieces of CGI sequences that look like they're taken from a not very good video game . Jackson might learn a lesson here that big massive spectacle doesn't equal good cinema especially if the sequence is created on computer software

I've got to be honest and say I've never read Tolkein apart from the first chapter of The Two Towers ( I think Jackson improved upon The Departure Of Boromir ) and really couldn't care less about continuity and the history of Middle Earth . Likewise I have no interest in how BORN OF HOPE fits in to the continuity of the Tolkein universe but the story is lacking somewhat and is a rather simplistic tale of how a village in Midddle Earth defends itself against Orc incursions . That said quest stories as seen in the original Ring trilogy aren't known for their multi-layered complex storytelling but THE HOBBIT hardly has a story requiring one three hour film never mind a three film trilogy . I also noticed the acting here is a little bit " off " compared to that seen in LOTR to be honest the acting of the original franchise was one of the best things about it and certainly Oscar worthy from the entire ensemble cast

In all this is a very impressive film made by people who care about their subject . It might be because I was expecting a sad bunch of anoraks seen in the infamous " lightening strike " youtube video that my low expectations for this amateur film exceeded what I expected by a long shot . It's certainly not perfect but you have to ask yourself if a bunch of non professional film makers can make something of this quality why is Peter Jackson and his colleagues with their multi million budgets aren't capable of making something much better ?

Overall Born of Hope is a good movie. It was character driven, accurate and enjoyable. You forget the budget is small once you get taken in by the tale. In no way is it a rip-off of of Jackson's trilogy because it is a historic story from the same land and people......Middle Earth; as well as written by the same visionary author.....J.R.R Tolkien. Since the film isn't plot driven it can seem as if it's not going to twist and climax; however, the story goes on for generations and this film is only an hour long......It does end well. I would like to see more films from the Tolkien books before I'm an old man and was quite pleased to find this one. Give it a try if you have some shred of imagination and don't get bogged down by a lack of shinny things.

Having thoroughly enjoyed the short but sweet story from The Hunt for Gollum, I was delighted to experience another LOTR fan film - but this time from a different Director and ultimately from a different perspective.

Although perhaps in less style, this film packs a fuller storyline with greater substance than its independent predecessor. The romance is multi-layered; the action is smooth; the costumes and settings are fantastic; and the set is beautifully crafted to create the perfect homestead ambiance.

The characters are surprisingly well defined, for such a relatively short feature, and this is complemented well by two outstanding acting performances in particular - Christopher Dane (Arathorn) and Kate Madison (Elgarain).

Other than the above, I loved the script and was also surprised by a subtly professional music score.

All in all, the success of Born of Hope should encourage other independent film-makers to take hold of their own production reins and create individualistic, original and just plain enjoyable fan films.

A fan film made and privately funded by enthusiasts of JRR Tolkien's LOTR, this prequel narrates the story of Arathorn, heir to Isildur's throne, and father of Aragorn, who would play a pivotal role in the Great War of the Third Age of Middle Earth. Although understandably far lacking in technical polish compared to the studio funded films, it is surprisingly heartfelt, well made and earnest. As best as can be expected, the cinematography, acting , film score, location shooting, production design and storyline are all very well done. The script also appears to be quite faithful to whatever Tolkien wrote about the Dunedain. In particular, Christoper Dane (a dead ringer for Sean Bean in many shots) and Kate Madison as Arathorn and Elgarain both play their parts superbly. Actually, I'm seriously so impressed by it. And if you're a fan of Tolkien's work, this is a must watch.

I think that considering it's a low-budget film made by without big-name backing it"s not bad at all. Most of the acting is what you'd expect from this sort of thing, with somewhat wooden performances. The fighting scenes are actually rather good, and manage to convey a higher number of combatants than there actually are, without using computer-generated imagery. The Troll is rather pathetic, but I won"t hold it against them...

All in all, I have one major complaint - Beth Aynsley. She can't bloody act, she is very far from being beautiful (and yes, she is supposed to be) and she is the main reason I gave this film 6 stars. I truly cannot comprehend why the director (who BTW acts much better than Aynsley, in addition to being the producer and the director) chose her for the part...