Born of Hope

I was not expecting anything spectacular. How can you when it is only a fan-made independent film? But 'The Hunt for Gollum' was a lot better. Unlike the latter, 'Born of Hope' has an abysmally poor plot. While yes, the plot is at least in existence it does not really go anywhere, so you are not particularly interested in what is going to happen.

The acting was alright, even if it was hard to believe. The narrator was awful though. She ruined it for me.

The effects were good enough, and the costumes and the setting was commendable considering that the film was done on a shoe-string budget.

This is worth a watch, only if you're a fan of The Lord of the Rings. If not, you won't really enjoy it. Having said that, I am a fan and I was bored by it.

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.

This is a film made truly for die-hard Tolkien fans. While meticulously consistent with the story lines established by the author, fans solely of the film will likely be rather bored with it. This exceptionally well-crafted, fan-made, micro-budgeted film, while it takes great pains to share visual continuity with Jackson's films (and does so remarkably well, despite the tiny budget) is long on dialogue and short on action, creating a tone which is more consistent with Tolkien's "histories" (ie, The Children of Hurin, Lost Tales) than to his novels (The LOTR Trilogy, The Hobbit). If you fall into the former category of fans, you'll undoubtedly be pleased by its overall faithfulness to Tolkienian lore, the excellent casting, above-average acting, true-to-Jackson costuming and surprising cinematography and scoring. But if your only experience of The Lord Of The Rings is the films and you're not a fantasy reader, you'll probably think the Orcs look lame and be really bored by it.

It is professional grade quality! Acting, editing, script, costumes, sets,music, make-up--it's all in the professional category. The only complaint I have is that I can't have the DVD in high def. It belongs very proudly on my shelf next to the LotR movies. It's clear that you all have futures in the moving making industry if you want them. You stayed close to the vision of Tolkien, and for that reason alone, I'm very grateful. That it is free to us is one of the greatest mathoms ever given, but I would gladly have paid to see this at the theater. Perhaps maybe one day.

Kate and crew...great work! You should be very proud. I'll be watching this often.

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.