Lovely Bones’ is flawed art, Frodo

The problem with completing a massive project such as “The Lord of the Rings” trilogy, which garnered a number of Academy Awards, is that it can cause a person to freeze. What do you do next? It’s happened to filmmakers as diverse as Federico Fellini and Paul Mazursky.

Peter Jackson hasn’t stuggled too much. He followed LOTR with the box-office smash “King Kong” remake, and he’s involved himself in a number of other filmmakers’ projects, from Neill Blomkamp’s “District 9” to Guillermo del Toro’s “Hobbit.” But it’s been only with “The Lovely Bones” that Jackson has taken the filmmaker reins himself.

And the results are mixed.

Based on Alice Sebold’s novel , “The Lovely Bones” tells the story of 14-year-old Susie Salmon (the Irish actress Saoirse Ronan), whose murder leads her on a paranormal journey of justice and redemption. Susie is a normal girl, loving her parents (her father in particular) even as she is moving toward independence. She’s intrigued with an older boy, Ray (Reese Ritchie), and obsessed with taking photos of everything her eyes see.

What she doesn’t see is the neighbor (that’s Stanley Tucci underneath all that makeup) who has targeted her. And when she ends up his victim, we are along as she begins her journey into a realm that is haflway to where she will eventually go. She doesn’t go any farther because she can’t break bonds with her former life.

The question that the movie asks is simple: What are those bonds? Do they involve her killer and bringing him to justice? Do they involve the boy Ray who mourns her loss? Her younger sister, Lindsey (Rose McIver), who has her own maturing problems to cope with? Her mother (Rachel Weisz) and father (Mark Wahlberg), whose individual reactions to Susie’s disappearance cause a wall to grow between each other? Or all of them in concert?

As you can understand, most of “The Lovely Bones” is told in flashback, with Ronan providing the voiceover narration. That includes the sequences in which she travels through a heavenly landscape, much of which, because this is a Jackson production, looks suspiciously like the New Zealand featured in the LOTR series. And, thankfully, Jackson avoids showing any real graphic violence.

I’m particularly grateful for that Jackson’s restraint regarding violence. It’s hard enough to go and see a movie about a serial killer targeting teenage women. It would be unbearable were we to forced to endure the actual murders. But as welcome as Jackson’s decision to opt for art vs. exploitation is, I’m not sure that solves the problems that ensue.

For part of what “The Lovely Bones” is becomes a mystery story. And when you’re guiding viewers along such a path, it’s important to play with rules. And here is where Jackson fudges. How could a guy dig a whole cellar in the middle of a cornfield, in full view of a nearby suburban neighborhood, without attracting attention? How could he successfully remove all the incriminating evidence?

Jackson falls into the trap that has caught many other filmmakers (most notably Tarsem Singh, director of “The Cell” ): His killer is just a bit too much the genius. A far less complicated, and less artistic, rendering would have served Jackson’s story far better.

Given this detraction, which pulled me out of the movie every time it came up, “The Lovely Bones” is a beautiful achievement. Ronan is a good actress, even if she seems a little young to be such a draw for the boy Ray. And while Susan Sarandon is little more than a cliche as Weisz’s mother, McIver proves to be a hardy choice for Susie’s younger sister. And, overall, Jackson’s eye for a fantasy world is unerringly beautiful.

Someday I gotta visit New Zealand . Frodo is still beckoning.

Below : The trailer for Peter Jackson’s “The Lovely Bones.”