perhaps a bit harsh

The Return of the King continues to pull in astonishing reviews, with a Rotten Tomatoes score of 97%. But not everyone is pleased. Consider the Weekly Standard's Jonathan V. Last, for instance. Some of his points seem well taken—although I will have to see the film again just to be sure—but his concluding prediction almost certainly misses the mark.

[T]he real measure will come later down the line. Five years from now, “Fellowship” and “The Two Towers” will be the discs that go in the DVD player when people want to cozy up to The Lord of the Rings. Purchased out of a sense of duty and devotion, “Return of the King” will sit on the shelf, collecting dust.

Brutal? Well, yes. But Last's criticism can't hold a candle to this assessment.

Perhaps this in itself is a kind of parable of Grace. Perhaps Peter Jackson is, after all, just a mini-Melkor (at least insofar as we perceive his influence to have been negative — in many ways I'm grateful to him for bringing Tolkien to the screen). He can't really create anything of his own. He can only embellish, enhance, twist, or mar the work of the original creator. The glory, of course, is that the creator's intentions still shine through. This, I think, is a testimony not only to the enduring power of Tolkien's creation, but to the God who informed and inspired it in so many ways.

Melkor—for those not up on Tolkien's complete legendarium—was the first Dark Lord (and the analogue of Lucifer). One could argue in response that Peter Jackson is too short to be anything greater than a mini-mini-Melkor; but somehow I don't think that would help.

MORE: The Democratic candidates weigh in.