Tolkien

Tolkien recounts the defining people and moments of the author's life.

Since the Lord of the Rings and the Hobbit movies interest has increased in Tolkien himself. While this film is no adventure it is both funny and touching as the subject evolves like one of the characters in his stories. This is interesting and I did enjoy it.

I'd have preferred it if the timeline had stretched a little bit further and covered more of his life than it does. The flash-forwards were well done up to that point.

I liked, 'Get off the lawn!'

The film is satisfying for the most part - I just wished there was another hour tagged onto the ending which would show us how he created some of his legendarium.

The film mainly focuses on his friendships and romance with Edith in school - very little of the war was shown. Also showed his relationships with a couple of his teachers.

You will easily see in the film how things connected to his books - hidden references as well obvious ones.

Very good movie if you like biographies, romances and/or Tolkien.

8/10

Tolkien was an unashamedly highly devout Catholic. The movie completely misses all of this.

For example, the movie opens with the Tolkien family thrust into poverty. It skips the fact that this was because Tolkien's mother converters to Catholicism in a very anti-Catholic Britain and was ostracised by her family who would not support her at all. Many more such examples missed. Tolkien called his mother a "martyr for Catholicism" and that The Lord of the Rings was fundamentally "a Catholic story."

...because it represents more than a biopic. Because it gives a bitter - poetic portrait of familiar things. From friendship to bitter choices, from love to discover of vocation, from war to the most significant small things defining you. Because it is real well acted and has inspired script and propose a version of Tolkien ' s life more touching and precise than I expect. A film about war and passion and friendship and love , seductive for the game of nuances and for a sort of...magic. And, sure, Nicholas Hould seems the most wise option for the roles of real, real special writers.

The story and the excellent cinematography alone make for agood film. For some reason they forced in elements that had the effect of pandering to the weak minded. The film would have been much improved if these elements were left out.

It's enough to see a fellowship develop in the prep school and the visual scenes of WWI without CG of dragon silhouettes and ghosts in gas clouds. We audience members can make connections on our own and guess at what inspired him. I doubt he was thinking about dragons while seeing an actual flamethrower used in warfare.

The real story was in the details and they were good.