Reviewing the Best Movies Ever Made: The Fellowship of the Ring, Mulholland Drive, The Dark Knight

In this edition of Reviewing the Best Movies Ever Made, we’ll review three of the five movies in the series that were released in the 2000s. These are three very different and distinct movies! One serves as an introduction to an epic fantasy adventure that defined fantasy films in the early 2000s. Another is the most well-known, and highest regarded, David Lynch story. And finally, the third movie we’ll be taking a look at is the second entry in a super hero trilogy that cemented the superstar status of director Christopher Nolan.

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

IMDb No. 9

New Line Cinema, 178 minutes

It’s hard to believe that the The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, the first movie in the trilogy based off of J.R.R. Tolkien’s epic fantasy novels, is over 20 years old. The Fellowship of the Ring was a huge hit both critically and commercially upon its release, and it really revitalized interest in fantasy epics of this type. In 2023, the film still holds up wonderfully as a sweeping epic masterfully put together by director Peter Jackson.

The Fellowship of the Ring’s greatest strength might be the way it’s able to transport us to Middle Earth. Tolkien’s world feels so vast and full in the film. It is a magical place full of diverse species and places, and whether we’re in the Shire with the hobbits or Rivendell with the elves, every location feels unique and beautiful in its own way. The film won Academy Awards for Best Cinematography, Visual Effects, Original Score, and Makeup, and all of these categories tie into creating the “feeling” of the universe of the film.

Acting-wise, the cast is great. There are plenty of characters in The Fellowship of the Ring, but most of them play an important role in the story. Even characters we don’t focus too much on, like elves Arwen and Elrond, have an air of importance about them. We can tell that we’re being shown just part of a much larger story here, and it adds to the epic-feel of the film. The movie’s opening, which is one of the best openings ever, further contributes to this notion of a great tale encompassing many generations and covering several centuries.

Elijah Wood is well-cast as the hero of the fellowship, Frodo Baggins. The standout performance of the film though comes from Ian McKellen as the wizard Gandalf. Gandalf acts as a leader and guide to our party of heroes, and he really commands our attention too, as viewers, whenever he’s on the screen.

Despite being nearly three-hours long, The Fellowship of the Ring is never the least bit boring. The plot moves along at a quick enough pace, while still allowing for important character moments along the way. Frodo’s relationships with Gandalf, Sam, and Aragorn each feels developed, special, and important.

There is an extended edition of The Fellowship of the Ring, as there are for all three films in the trilogy, which adds around thirty minutes to the movie’s runtime. While fans of the source material might love seeing more scenes from the novel, I definitely didn’t find the theatrical cut of the movie to be lacking in any way. In fact, every scene in the film feels significant to our overall story. The Fellowship of the Ring is the perfect first entry into one of the best epic fantasy stories ever told.

Grade: 9.5/10

Mulholland Drive (2001)

Sight & Sound No. 8

Universal Pictures, 146 minutes

If you’re a diehard fan of David Lynch, you’ll probably love the most well-known film that he both wrote and directed, Mulholland Drive. If you’re anyone else, however, you’ll likely find the film to be an uninspired, unfulfilling mess. When a movie ends, it’s totally fine if the audience is left with questions as to what they just watched and as to what really transpired in the film. When I finished watching Mulholland Drive though, the main question I was left with was: “Who cares?”

I’m definitely a fan of abstract movies where reality is blurred and viewers need to piece together what’s actually occured. One great example of this type of film done well is Dennis Villeneuve’s 2013 psychological thriller, Enemy. Is that film bizarre at times and does it feature things like giant spiders? Yes, yes, it does. However, it’s a film that when you realize what’s actually going on feels like it has a purpose and it works. It’s the type of movie that merits multiple watches.

Mulholland Drive is Lynch’s attempt at a similar abstract film. Unlike a movie like Enemy though, it comes off as too weird and off-putting, and (worst of all) its payoff feels cheap. Nothing about Mulholland Drive feels earned. The ultimate twist of Mulholland Drive, which I won’t reveal here, left me feeling cheated and not caring at all about the story I’d just watched.

Imagine if I told you a fantastical story that was weird, but still interesting to you. You’re curious about where I’m going with my story and how it’ll all come together. But then, I say, “Actually, the explanation is that the story was taking place on Jeffrey World – a world that seems identical to the real world, but where I can make whatever I want to happen occur, and that’s the explanation.” Basically, that’s what Lynch has made his version of with Mulholland Drive.

That’s not to say that there aren’t other issues with the film, too. From the start, this one definitely has a unique “David Lynch” aesthetic and tone that’ll likely turn off a lot of viewers. It’s also super pretentious. This is a movie that feels designed for people who want to “get it” and then think they’re smarter than everyone else since they do – even when what there is to “get” and understand is neither really that profound or interesting.

Grade: 2.5/10

The Dark Knight (2008)

IMDb No. 3

Warner Bros. Pictures, 152 minutes

When Christopher Nolan’s second entry into his Batman trilogy, The Dark Knight, was released 15 years ago, saying that it was a huge cultural phenomenon at the time would be an understatement. The Dark Knight was the biggest movie of 2008, grossing over a billion dollars, nearly three times the box office of Batman Begins. When watching The Dark Knight in 2023 though, without being wrapped up in the hype of the film, it’s more of just a “good” super hero movie, and not really a great motion picture.

Part of the reason for The Dark Knight’s commercial success was the buzz surrounding the movie’s antagonist, the Joker, who was played by Heath Ledger. Ledger sadly passed away several months before the film’s release, and his performance in the movie is, by far, the film’s highlight. Every time Ledger’s Joker is on the screen, he demands our attention. He is, without a doubt, the movie’s most interesting character and the scenes with him are just as entertaining today.

In contrast, the other performances in the movie are mostly “fine.” Christian Bale’s portrayal of Batman is adequate, even if the Batman voice is more than a little bit ridiculous. I wish that the script gave Bale the opportunity to add something else to this version of the Caped Crusader. One of the best parts of the Batman character is that he’s a master detective, and that aspect of him is completely absent from The Dark Knight. In the movie, we get that Bruce Wayne is a rich playboy and that Batman is great fighter, but there’s not much more characterization than that to the hero.

Acting-wise, the weak link in the cast is definitely Maggie Gyllenhaal as Rachel Dawes, who’s supposed to be the love interest to both Bruce Wayne and Harvey Dent. Gyllenhaal’s Rachel has absolutely no chemistry with either man though, and her performance itself feels really out of place in this Batman universe. In Batman Begins, this same character was played by Katie Holmes. I don’t think Holmes is a great actress, but she fit better into that first Batman movie than Gyllenhaal does here.

Concerning the story, The Dark Knight is, again, just okay. The first third of the movie is a little long, with probably too much time spent dealing with Batman going up against “the mob.” It’s the final act of the film, however, where The Dark Knight is at its weakest. The climax of the film involves a “will they or won’t they” scenario involving nameless characters on two ferries that’s pretty uninspired. The movie also suffers in its final minutes from characters ignoring an obvious solution to a dilemma presented to them, and instead opt for another resolution just because it feels like that’s the direction Nolan wants to take things and not because it’s what makes the most obvious sense.

Overall, The Dark Knight is still far from bad if you simply take it for what it is — a mostly entertaining superhero blockbuster with one outstanding performance.

Grade: 7/10

Rankings: The 25 “Best” Movies Rated So Far

Schindler's List (1993): 10/10 (AFI No. 8, IMDb No. 6)

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001): 9.5/10 (IMDb No. 9)

The Wizard of Oz (1939): 9.5/10 (AFI No. 10)

Casablanca (1942): 9/10 (AFI No. 3)

The Godfather (1972): 9/10 (AFI No. 2, IMDb No. 2)

Man with a Movie Camera (1929): 9/10 (S&S No. 9)

The Godfather Part II (1974): 8/10 (IMDb No. 4)

The Dark Knight (2009): 7/10 (IMDb No. 3)

Citizen Kane (1941): 4/10 (AFI No. 1, S&S No. 3)

Raging Bull (1980): 4/10 (AFI No. 4)

Mulholland Drive (2001): 2.5/10 (S&S No. 8)

Beau Travail (1999): 1.5/10 (S&S No. 7)