Who would have thought that a live action version of The Lord of the Rings could be brought to the big screen? More than that, would would have thought it would actually be any good? It's hard enough to bring a novel to life in the movies, but here is a series of books that is so well known, so loved, that the mere thought of creating a screenplay from them has daunted most. The books are too complex, they said.

Until recently, they were right.

It would never have been enough to get the story correct because so much of what makes The Lord of the Rings great is its visual texture. This may sound odd when talking about the written word, but J. R. R. Tolkien managed to create such distinct and detailed descriptions of his world that the novels have since shaped the very way we think a fantasy world should look. Every book, film and role-playing game since has been directly influenced by The Lord of the Rings.

I do not envy the battle director Peter Jackson must have gone through to get this project going. Just imagine the checklist of questions he had to answer: Can you create a race of little people? Not midgets or dwarfs, mind you, but actual small people? No problem. How about orcs, golems, dragons and other mystical creatures? Here you go. Can you find locations that don't look like some nature preserve, but can actually convince people they're looking at Middle Earth? Got it covered. How about translating the massive, epic trilogy of books into a trilogy of films -- and remain faithful to the story? Can do.

The man must have sounded insane.

Still, he managed to find a studio just as insane as he was in New Line and they gave him the go-ahead. Not only that, but it was decided to remove any doubt of the insanity of the project and allow Jackson to film all three chapters simultaneously. This would allow them to maintain a consistent visual look and pace.

So after much speculation, much hype, many uncertainties and a grueling production schedule, only one question really remained: Would the films be any good?

During the production of the films, Peter Jackson said that it was his hope that these three films would do for the fantasy genre what Star Wars did for science fiction. If this first installment is any indication, I think the trilogy has a good chance of doing just that.

After several stabs at the genre that range from astonishingly bad (Dungeons and Dragons) to entertaining, but mediocre (Willow), here at last is a film to define cinematic fantasy. Quite simply, The Lord of the Rings is nothing short of a triumph, a home run that is right on track to become a grand slam.

The first intallment, The Fellowship of the Rings, opens with a long exposition about the history of Middle Earth, particularly the One Ring and an epic battle to destroy it. We are briefly introduced to Bilbo Baggins' (Ian Holm) adventures from The Hobbit and the role he played in the rediscovery of the Ring. There is a definite danger is starting out a film with a long narration, but it works here and conveys some essential information that prevents having to slow down the film later.

From there we enter the Shire, where the Hobbits live. The famous wizard, Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen), has returned in time for Bilbo's birthday. Bilbo, who has not aged a day since aquiring the ring, has decided it is time for him to leave the Shire and finish his novel.

At the same time, the spirit of the evil wizard Sauron has returned and has dispatched agents, ring wraiths, to reclaim the ring. The wraiths are able to hone in the ring's location each time it is used. This spells bad news for the shire when Biblo uses the ring to make a dramatic exit from his party.

Bilbo entrusts the ring to his nephew, Frodo (Elijah Wood), and leaves the Shire for his new adventures. With the threat to the Shire imminent, Gandalf convinces Frodo to take the ring out of the Shire. This, of course, is the beginning of the great adventure for Frodo and his companions, Sam (Sean Astin), , Merry (Dominic Monighan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd).

Now, no real talk about The Fellowship of the Ring could take place without acknowledging the siginifcant differences between the film and the book. By very nature, the film needs to be faster paced and more dynamic. In fact, this is where the film has a chance to excell. The novels were always more about the characters than the action. In fact, the battles always seemed almost like an afterthought -- necessary to the story, but not necessary to describe in detail.

The medium of film gives us the opportunity to visualize the more kinetic elements of the tale. The trick is to display the great battles, but not at the expense of the story or characters. Peter Jackson manages to handle this task very well. While the characters aren't quite as realized as in the novels, they are still given plenty of depth and emotion. And if the characters seem at all cliched, you must keep in mind that these characters are what inspired the cliches.

There does seem to be something of a deliberation to the events as they unfold, as though the characters all know what awaits them. This lends a storyteller aspect to the film, as though this is a fable being handed down to us -- which, in a sense, is exactly what The Lord of the Rings is.

Jackson's direction is solid and the editing and cinematography are first-rate. Where other fantasy films seem like soundstage or backlot efforts, this film really looks and feels like Middle Earth. The effects work is top-notch, also adding to the feeling of realism. Many of the effects are right in your face, but some of the best, such as the creation of the Hobbits, is much more subtle and effective.

I have to admit that I was skeptical about this project. That skepticism was turned to astonishment and amazement when I actually saw the finished product. Will this film do for fantasy what Star Wars did for science fiction? I can't say. What I do know is that despite already knowing the story, this film managed to inspire a sense of wonder in me similar to what Lucas' 1977 epic inspires.