Nit-Pickers Guide to Deviations in Jackson's LotR 712
bcolflesh submits "A lengthy list of deviations to be found when comparing the text of The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien and the translation of those texts to film as undertaken by Peter Jackson, et.al."
Missed a few.. (Score:5, Funny)
That dude missed a few glaring deviations.
Fellowship of the Ring
75. In the book, Gandalf isn't the one saying "You shall not pass!", It's the Black Knight. King Arthur subsequently hacks off all of the Knight's arms and legs leaving a limbless knight protesting on the ground.
The Two Towers
107. In the book it isn't an army of Orcs that decimate the army of the good guys, it's a bunny with "a vicious streak a mile wide". Also, the magical fellow warning them in the book is an Enchanter named Tim, not a Wizard named Gandalf.
The Return of the King
77. In the movie, Gollum falls into the lava of Mt. Doom and dies. The book clearly states that John Cleese carries him to a cart while Gollum protests "I'm not dead!" Eric Idle then crushes his skull with a club then runs off to the Robinsons' as "they've lost nine today."
damn slacker..
Re:Missed a few.. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Missed a few.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Missed a few.. (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm glad to see that you don't let whimsical, comical writing stand in the way of your enjoyment of books. I have to wonder just how funny a Martha Stewart biography could be, but if you insist...
Calling The Lord of the Rings half-witted, or implying that it's droll, shows a complete ignorance of the subject matter. The Hobbit was a droll book IMHO, but there was very little whimsical or amusing
Re:Missed a few.. (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, and I didn't think he'd be stupid enough to fall into Mt. Doom AGAIN! Silly Gollum...
Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Peter Jackson's work is a movie, not a book.
Done.
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Insightful)
Nobody I've spoken to is even the least bit troubled by the skipping of Tom Bombadil's chapters, the compressing of a couple dozen elf jobs into Arwen's character, the burning of the shire becoming a dream sequence, etc. What few nit-picks I thought I had about TTT turned out to be included in the Special Edition after all. Frankly, I think the majority of the changes were slight improvements, and all very faithful to the spirit of the work.
So, is there anybody out there that can name a change or two that they actually considered a major let-down?
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Insightful)
yes. Aragorn falling off the cliff in TTT and "dieing" was pointless. We already had enough "fake-out" deaths in the first movie that were actually in the text (frodo w/ the cave troll, gandalf at the bridge) that Aragon's "death" just seemed like too much cliche. Especially since it was no where to be found in the text.
I'm still unsure whether the whole "take Frodo to Osgilith" scene was necessary or not. I understand Jackson's purpose (Faramir is human and corruptable by the ring, so that *needs* to be shown explicitly to drive the point home), I'm just not sure if I liked how it was handled.
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Insightful)
I didn't like it, myself. In the book Faramir is corruptible but not corrupted. I thought Faramir was a much better character in the book than in the movie. Ditto for Denother, who is just a crazy old man in the movie. He's much more tragic in the book.
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:3, Insightful)
in the EVDVD of TTT, you see more of faramir and have his actions explained: Faramir is a flat character in the book, which i agree with. Having him grow, pass the test like all the other respectable characters in the movie was just showing the fault of all people and the power of the ring. A nice tough, i thought. also, the EVDVD shows good stuff with that whole family. not in the b
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Interesting)
Agreed. I might add one more thing: Sam turning around in Mordor in ROTK. Not only was this not in the book, but it is a complete reversal in the character developed so well in the movies themselves. I do not feel that it is true to Sam's character in the least. If you are going to have a rift between Frodo and Sam, at least have Sam wait for a bit and then follow from a distance.
Imagine this scene if you will. Frodo tells Sam to leave and continues up the stair. Sam sits down and cries. He finally gets up and starts to look down the stairs. He stiffens and mutters, "I made a promise." He then sets his shoulders and begins the climb up the stairs. You still have the rift, but at least Sam stays true to himself. While this is certainly not from the book, it would at least lend consistency within the movies.
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Interesting)
You're not far wrong. "I made a promise," would have been a good line for Sam to use, but perhaps it would have been best while he was crying, after Frodo left. Then we would have felt even more strongly how beaten Sam was by Frodo's rejection of him, how rejected he felt.
Furthemore, it's not strictly out of character for Sam to place Frodo's judgement over his own, to feel doubt, to wonder if maybe Mr. Frodo is right and the ring is getting to Sam. So, to have Sam say "I made a promise" *before* heading downhill would have dramatized that self-conflict very effectively. Pity Jackson, et. al. didn't think of it.
And then the turn-around when he discovers the lembas Gollum threw over the cliff would have made more sense as a confirmation to Sam that he wasn't losing his marbles, which would provide further motivation to his decision to turn-around and follow Frodo.
Thought the Faramir bit was poor (Score:3, Insightful)
The whole point of having the Faramir/Boromir combo in the book was to contrast them - one brother who tries to steal the ring (and pays for it), and the other who has an opportunity to take the ring and purposely does not.
The way
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Informative)
Which was fine with me, until I read the book and saw that the blade was re-forged at the Council of Elrond, before the bulk of the journey began.
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Interesting)
(1) Arwen -- very minor and peripheral character in the book with, as the article mentions, only one line in the entire saga (not that I mind seeing Liv Tyler, but I found that whole subplot extremely contrived).
(2) Aragorn -- he has been working toward his 'destiny' his entire life; there is no "Oh, I'm not good enough" angst in the books.
(3) Faramir -- was struck by a poisoned dart riding back toward the citadel, and was carried back by another warrior (and to begin with was never sent on a suicide mission by his father).
(4) Sam -- was never sent away by Frodo, who never trusted Gollum but knew he may be of use.
The omissions -- like the Scouring of the Shire -- were a little disappointing but necessary. All of the changes, however, were gratuitous Hollywood and detracted from the story IMHO.
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Interesting)
1) The appendix gives enough of the plotline to support most of the films rendition (the "her fate is tied to the ring" b.s. from RotK is full of it, of course).
One of the issues (and I wrote about it here a year ago) is that in the book, much of Aragorn's growth from ranger to king happens before the hobbits ever meet him. he knows what he has to do, now its just a matter of finding the right time.
it actually makes for a relatively flat character on film, because film doesn't give enough room to build backstory without too many flashbacks, which isn't a good film device the way its a very expressive novel device. The alternative would require a "Lord of the Rings 1 1/2" (nee: The Lion King prequel coming out on video this month).
2) "working towards his destiny" -- again, there's much extending that in the appendices. Denathor had heard of him (though not as succinctly as the movie depicts) and developed an opinion of his perceived immaturity, a reputation that had to come from somewhere. Aragorn's angst at accepting his role is there, in backstory and in the appendix.
having aragorn grow to accept his destiny in "realtime" on screen makes for a much more interesting character on film.
The cliff crap in TTT I would rather have done without. There are better ways to show 1) that there was a 10000 orc army coming, and 2) that Eowyn has the hots for him.
3) most of the Faramir I could have lived without. Denethor on screen is much weaker than he should have been. Denethor in the book is a masterful politician. On screen he is a slothful wretch. In the book, we can build up a sympathy for the betrayal and pain he's faced; he's a complex character with conflict between his compassion for his people and the dread he's seen in the Palantir. In the film, we only feel anger at him for not trying harder to have some compassion at all.
He's a jerk on film. when he dies its, "finally, and good ridance", which is not the emotion Tolkien wanted us to feel.
4) i didn't mind the Sam changes as much; yes, Frodo comes out more affected by the ring than the books, but Sam himself isn't changed as such. He still had the decision of go back to Frodo or go forward with the ring himself; the additional option of going home alone doesn't really hurt the story.
I *DID* dislike that Gollum was "pushed" by Frodo into the lava instead of falling in by his own greed and carelessness. In the end, on film he wasn't the victim of his addiction as it should have been portrayed. Even the Rankin/Bass version got THAT part right.
Gollum wasn't pushed in the movie (Score:5, Interesting)
I saw it twice, and I'm fairly certain that Gollum wasn't pushed. He was dancing about with glee at recovering "his precious" just as in the book.
I agree with you completely about Denethor. Its really the only grievance I have left about the movies. Every other complaint I had (and I was seriously unhappy with the Two Towers theatrical version) has been mollified by the extended versions. In the extended editions, deviations like Aragorn's fall, and Faramir's Osgiliath make much more sense and flow better. In nearly every case I found that, while the movies departed from the narrative of the book, the purpose was usually to reveal some facet of the characters that was true to the book, such as Aragorn's facility with animals, or Faramir's conflicted sense of duty.
I'm quite confident that Denethor's character will be much more developed in the Extended RotK.
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not gonna pull out a book, but if you go back you will see Aragorn's indecision and self doubt in a number of places. The first is after the fall of Gandalf while they rest in Lorien. The second is the death of Boromir and the breaking of the Fellowship. The thi
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:3, Interesting)
How did that not come across? He and Frodo struggled with each other for the ring, and that's how they fell off the cliff. All Jackson did was put Frodo in there too--so now BOTH of them were victims of their addiction.
You even see Gollum staring at the ring, oblivious to pain, as he sinks into the burning lava. Come on.
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:3, Flamebait)
Let's see:
Changes to Theodan's character - didn't hurt too much, but unnecessary and disruptive to the plot
Changes to Denthenor's character - turned him from King Lear into something far less tragic and meaningful
Wasting of Galadrial's encounter with Frodo - key point in the book where the Elves show they have learned something after 3000 years of stupid
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:3, Insightful)
Theoden not Theodan
Galadriel not Galadrial
And I would have to look up the correct spelling for Dol Guldur(sp?) But I do know that what you have "Dol Guilder" is patently wrong.
I wouldn't mind save for the fact that the people doing this are claiming to huge fans of the book, and being remarkably pedantic.
Jedidiah.
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Insightful)
In TTT, why do the Ents decide not to go to war at the Entmoot? It is even less believable that when the hobbits show them a lot of tree stumps, that they suddenly change their mind (and just happened to be standing at the edge of the forest to respond to TreeBeard's call). If Treebeard didn't know how much his own forest was being cut down, well, pretty bad tree-herder IMHO.
With dramatic music and sound effects etc, Peter Jackson could probably have done a fairly good job of the tension in the hobbits while waiting(will they help or not?), then the cry for war coming from the Ents.
Such a simple change, with large repercussions. Why did he have to make it?
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Insightful)
Skipping the old forest and scouring of the Shire (although I'd have liked a direct-to-video version of those), greater role for Arwen. In the context of a movie, these changes work really well.
My really major peave:
The dead turn up to win the battle at Minas Tirith, (ROTK nitpick 40). This has two major bad effects:
(1) It completely devalues all of the heroism of the soldiers of Gondor and Rohan - the only effect they had was to delay the outcome long enough for the dead to arrive, and that could have happened in time without them had Aragon just left for the paths of the dead a day earlier.
(2) The structure of TLoTR has a climax that is locatable to a single sentence: the good guys are disparing when the corsair's ships come up the river, thinking that Pelagir has fallen, and reinforcements are coming for the enemy. Then the clouds break and Aragon's royal banner is unfurled on the lead ship. There was much rejoicing. This should have made for a hugely cinematic moment, but instead we got light humour (Aragon, Gimli, Legolas jumping on to the dock and making a comment about 'plenty of orcs for everyone.')
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, that one bothered me too. I mean, what was the point of even fucking fighting??? Just the let the dead guys take of it.
Seriously, why risk your life when a bunch of green dead guys are swarming over everything like a cartoon advertisement for a bathroom clea
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:4, Insightful)
sPh
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:3, Interesting)
All of the scenes after Frodo and Sam are picked up by the Eagles, are the final bows of the cast members on closing night. Every one of the major characters (except I can't remember a Boromir flashback at the end, but maybe that will be in the extended edition) gets one more scene at the e
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Insightful)
You couldn't be more wrong. The movies, by virtue of being very good movies in this age of visual information, will in fact become the standard telling of LOTR. The books will become the "other, harder to absorb" telling, and be relegated to college courses taught by anally retentive old men.
I'm not saying I approve of this outcome, but it is inevitable.
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, I think the parent post's prophecy is chilling. I see fewer and fewer kids reading for pleasure.
What you may not see in your circle of friends is that the vast majority of Americans DON'T read for pleasure. They'll go to the movies, or see it on TV, and then that will become The Definitive Version for them. You can argue the books' point of view till you're blue in the face, but you won't change their narro
Re:Needless amounts of effort! (Score:5, Informative)
BTW - if you are a Tolkien fan, this site is for you. A great resource for the Tolkien books.
Translations are always tough (Score:5, Insightful)
Worst translations ever is still mortal kombat2 and double dragon the movie. LOTR could have ended up that bad, thank god it didn't.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Translations are always tough (Score:3, Interesting)
You do realize Tolkien himself was willing to cut things like Helm's Deep for film, don't you? He deemed it "unnecessary" and fit for removal.
Tolkien was less uptight than his own fans. I don't get people who don't enjoy these movies and even call them "disappointing." ROTK blew me away.
Re:Translations are always tough (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Translations are always tough (Score:5, Insightful)
Another site... (Score:4, Informative)
Linky [appenzeller.net]
Links are at the bottom for differences in each of the three movies.
what an exhausing exhaustive list (Score:4, Funny)
Re:what an exhausing exhaustive list (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:what an exhausing exhaustive list (Score:3, Insightful)
You do realize it's all about the money don't you ?
Re:what an exhausing exhaustive list (Score:3, Insightful)
Who cares (Score:3, Insightful)
In fact I think the LotR trilogy adhered more to the books on which they're based than any other film I can care to mention, but not for a moment in the cinema did I think to myself "ah, they've left a bit out there". I was too caught up in the story, and that's what I go to the cinema for. I'm not a professional critic... (Grin: I'm just very critical
Simon
Re:Who cares (Score:5, Insightful)
They don't diviate from the books - at all, except skipping entire chapters, and leaving out lots of Quiditch (+/- spelling). VERY boring. At the premiere of the first movie, I was reciting lines for the characters, before they did themselves - it's that bad. If you want something that sticks that close to the books - READ THE DAMN BOOKS!!!
So LotR doesn't follow the books like canon. They take liberties. They interpret. Good! Books are NOT the same media as films, just as radio is not the same media as books. Look at the H2G2 discussion for what I mean. "Waa waa waa, they won't follow the books to the letter, waa waa waa." Get a grip - the books didn't even follow the radio show that closely, as Douglas Adams, creator of both, knew that they are entirely different media.
Sometimes I wonder if the universe wouldn't be better off, if the Vogons actually destroyed earth.
Remember the MST3K theme song? (Score:5, Funny)
and other science facts (la la la),
Then repeat to yourself, "It's just a show,
I should really just relax"
This is nice, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This is nice, but... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This is nice, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
sPh
Re:This is nice, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
this is a new one.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:this is a new one.... (Score:5, Funny)
well... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think because this is a movie, and we need to quickly show that this is a very serious matter that Gandalf is talking about. Plus it gives more punch to the '...and something about the end of the world.' line.
--
In London? Need a Physics Tutor? [colingregorypalmer.net]
American Weblog in London [colingregorypalmer.net]
don't forget to scroll to the bottom (Score:4, Informative)
(if the page is slashdotted, it is president bush wearing the ring of doom)
Incredible! (Score:5, Funny)
Seriously nit-picky (Score:5, Funny)
Erm, yes of course. Because a character has been completely removed from a theatrical adaptation of the book, then his absense in making a small suggestion elsewhere in the book is only somewhat understandable...
By the sounds of these, I feel they were on a mission to reach point number 1000 or somewhere near that. Pedants! Bah!
He forgot one obvious deviation.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:He forgot one obvious deviation.. (Score:5, Funny)
Somebody had some spare time ha? (Score:3, Interesting)
All that and... (Score:5, Funny)
I swear, the first one who calls him simple or a fool or a bird-tamer is getting a punch in the mouth. : )
--
In London? Need a Physics Tutor? [colingregorypalmer.net]
American Weblog in London [colingregorypalmer.net]
My $0.02 (Score:3, Insightful)
Return of the King (Score:3, Informative)
A Bugg
Re:Return of the King (Score:3, Informative)
Complete List of Changes (Score:5, Informative)
I don't understand why (Score:4, Interesting)
So why did Jackson make the changes? Just to prove that he was the man in charge?
And by the way, I have a hard time imagining that any woman or child of Rohan would have run screaming helplessly from a band of invading Orcs. Cried, sure. While picking up the closest sword/wooodaxe/sycthe and charging toward the orcs.
sPh
Can't we just enjoy things for once? (Score:5, Insightful)
Quite frankly, the LOTR trilogy is perhaps the best fantasy/sci-fi book to film adaptation of all time. I mean, you only have to look at how Hollywood managed to screw up Dune to see how bad it can get: nobody who hasn't already read the book has a chance of following what's going on and why because the film leaves out vital chunks of the storyline. (Yes, I know about the history behind the making of that film. Let's not go into that here please.)
In contrast, Peter Jackson's adaptation left out few things that anyone but a die-hard fan would call vital. Where he did cull the story was where it was needed if the story was to translate onto the silver screen successfully. And when he did cull, he culled gently.
Remember, the Extended Editions contain a lot of extra scenes and footage and flesh out the story further, but even then they aren't everything Tolkien wrote; if they had been then the films would have lasted five to six hours minimum, at which point they become more tour de force and less entertainment.
As I said, Jackson's trilogy is fantastic. Personally, I'd like to thank him for giving a literary classic the respectful treatment it deserves.
Re:Can't we just enjoy things for once? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a friend who is a big movie enthusiast, who loves to predict exactly what will happen, 20, 40, and 60 minutes into the future of the film. Then he sits back, utterly unsurprised by the plot twists he saw coming a mile off, and crows about how he saw it all coming. This strikes me as really perverse, but it's how he enjoys movies.
Other people get off on finding flaws that people like me would never be able to spot in a hundred viewings. It's just the way some people are wired up.
Re:Can't we just enjoy things for once? (Score:3, Insightful)
No, I didnt RTFA (Score:4, Insightful)
1 - As has been posted, there are books, and there are movies. They aren't the same.
2 - You really don't want a faithful movie version of the book you love. I've read through The Hobbit and LotR books many times. Re-read them every couple of years, love them, think of them as old friends. Peter Jackson's movies were something new and something I, and many fans, enjoyed.
I'll contrast those movies with the Harry Potter movies, which are about as faithful an adaptation as could be made. And they are as boring and stiff as could be. 'Oh look...it's everything I've read in the book up on a big screen...just as I read it...yawn.'
I'd compare it to making a radio play or audio book version. You can be faithful to the original to the extreme, and end up with a recording of someone reading the book. Or you can do some adapting and interpreting for a new format an up with something that isn't 100% of the original, but brings something new, and hopefully entertaining, to the table.
My nitpick: more than one version in theatres! (Score:3, Insightful)
I mentioned this over here [slashdot.org]. There are at least two versions of RotK running in theatres.
It's not that particular change that bothers me, it's the idea that there could be other variations as well, and that we're missing out on good stuff. :-) I assume the variations are to try and track where the pirated versions come from.
the real list (Score:3, Funny)
1) inviting a girl to the book is usually a bad idea
2) the text version is recommended if you plan on wearing nothing but your boxers all day
3) if you've been at the bar all night, keep in mind that the books are significantly less enjoyable for illiterate people (temporary or not)
Another set of guides (Score:3, Informative)
Fellowship of the Ring [appenzeller.net]
The Two Towers [appenzeller.net]
Return of the King [appenzeller.net]
Books are Great! (Score:5, Funny)
Text? (Score:5, Funny)
Thanks!!! (Score:3, Funny)
"76. Bilbo rides to the Grey Havens on a pony (ROTK p.381). Jackson has Bilbo ride to the Grey Havens in a covered wagon."
Thanks Nit-Picker!!!
Technical Difficulties... (Score:3, Funny)
2. What is so great about the ring? Sauron wore the ring, and his hand was cut off. I think Sauron should have gotten a refund.
3. Bilbo loved the ring, and had a good time with it. It scared the beejezus out of Frodo when he wore it. Why the difference?
4. If anyone deserved the ring, it was Boromir: "By the blood of our people are your lands kept free." Naw, give it to the cute little hobbits. No way.
STeve
Aragorn an archer? (Score:3, Interesting)
Nit Picking the Nit Picker (Score:4, Informative)
The White council drives Sauron from Dol Guldur at the epilogue of The Hobbit. That would have been before Frodo was born.
Righteous indignation isn't attractive (Score:4, Funny)
After the women left he was sulking in a corner and said something cruel and sexist about them. When I finally lost my patience and told him he reminded me of Denethor he stopped talking to me! Blessing in disguise, really.
What Tolkein thought about the movies (Score:4, Informative)
"He now wove the new thoughts into his music, and straightway discord arose about him, and many that sang nigh him grew dispondent, and their thought was disturbed and their music faltered; but some began to attune their music to his rather than to the thought which they had first."
-- J.R.R Tolkien, The Silmarillion
I honestly do not undestand the apolegtic attitude for Peter Jackson expressed here on Slashdot. Especially I do not understand the claim that all the changes Jackson made were neccessary for the film to be succesful. In fact I say that most of the changes were not needed: Peter Jackson just had to make the story "more American" and "more dramatic" by changing the delicate web of characters, events and themes created by J.R.R. Tolkien. It appears that Jackson thought that he could create a better LotR than Tolkien by introducing exaggerated battle scenes and gut-wrenching folk psychology -- the problem is Jackson's overgrown ego, not the structure of the book.
It is obvious that the book needed to be edited into a script, and that is OK to me. That editing, however, should have taken place by cutting away some scenes and spoken lines from the book. To corrupt the basic ideas and themes of an original work can not be forgiven. Peter Jackson made (especially in TTT) compeletely inexplicable choices, and for instance perverted Theoden's character from a great warrior king to a mindless follower of others.
Tolkien himself commented [66.102.11.104] an early non-filmed script (1958) by Zimmerman in his letter to Forrest J. Ackerman. Some of his comments are very thought-provoking, and seem to be directed straight to Peter Jackson. I urge everyone to read the letter and see what Tolkien really thought about movies based on his books.
Meanwhile, from a Tolkien author and scholar... (Score:5, Insightful)
Shippey's treatment was incisive, particular, thoughtful, and thoroughly illuminating. He mentioned a couple of specific points that Tolkien, in his estimation, would have focussed on to judge the quality.
First, Tolkien would have disliked habitual carelessness. Mispellings in the script, etc. Not a big deal in the movie, but there you have it.
Second, Tolkien would have been most concerned with what Shippey called "failing to adhere to the narrative core of the original." He noted that there was a great expansion of Aragorn et al's adventures after the Fellowship split up, but that on the whole the story remained faithful to the core of Frodo, Sam and Gollum's journey.
Third, it was noted that Tolkien had no objection to abridgement, as he understood to some extent the limitations of the different medium of film. Some things work on film, some don't -- internal monologue is one example I can think of. In a book, you can have a lot of it. In a film, you have to do it right, or drop it completely and express the core another way.
In relation #3, Tolkien objected to *compression* -- crushing thousands of years of history into a single chunk, whipping through it for only the sake of mentioning it, and moving on without it having impact. In this case, Shippey thought (and reflecting on it, I agree) that having the ring's history explained at the very start was a really smart move for the films.
This is not to say that Shippey wasn't confused at some of Jackson's inclusions. Legolas skateboarding and the multiple dwarf-tossing jokes were eyebrow raisers for a lot of people, I think. The weird death/ressurrection of Aragorn in TTT was described as a "narrative zag" in that it had no effect on the plot or character. You make a good point on theme, but depending on what you consider to be the vital them of the trilogy... well. Shippey said that one theme that didn't make it was the role of providence. I'd like to go more into that, but this is getting long and I need to wrap it up.
Shippey mentioned Tolkien's observations on the scripts for the animated films. I didn't know he had lived long enough to see them, so that's a new one on me. Something to keep in mind though is that even the medium of film has changed dramatically over the past 30 years. It's hard to take the critique of three-generations-back and apply it to what Jackson did. The scales are just too disperate.
In the end, I think Shippey's opinion was favorable overall.
Finally -- I appreciate the Silmarillion quote. But you should remember yourself that no artist creates in a vaccuum. Tolkien claimed, twisted, adjusted, and applied numerous myths and themes from stories past in order to create LotR. I find LotR to be a more engaging read than, say, Beowulf or the Viking Sagas, so I guess you can count me as one of those detracting voices in the song. I guess it depends on which song you sing first.
Re:What Tolkein thought about the movies (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What Tolkein thought about the movies (Score:3, Insightful)
I honestly do not understand why some people have to revere Tolkien's works as being sacred. Hey, I like the books. It may be my favorite fantasy series (though Song of Ice and Fire is making a damn good run). And I still though the movies were brilliant. Heck, I think there were some things in the movies that were better than the books. (gasp)
To corrupt the basic ideas and themes of an original work can
Crowd estimation? (Score:3, Interesting)
After hearing back-and-forth about the numbers involving the million man march [bu.edu], finding out that there is currently no scientific method for crowd estimation [gaspee.com], I told him he has no basis for judging how many humanoids were in any army, and his untrained eye is probably way off.
Can anyone shed light on this conversation?
Kind of irrelevant... (Score:5, Funny)
1. Stand up halfway through the movie and yell loudly, "Wait...where the hell is Harry Potter?"
2. Block the entrance to the theater while screaming, "YOU.....SHALL....NOT..... PASS!" - After the movie, say "Lucas could have done it better."
3. Play a drinking game where you have to take a sip every time someone says, "the Ring."
4. Point and laugh whenever someone dies.
5. Ask everyone around you if they think Gandalf went to Hogwarts.
6. Finish off every one of Elrond's lines with "Mis..ter Ander-sonnn."
7. When Aragorn is crowned king, stand up and at the top of your lungs sing, "And I did it.... MY way...!"
8. Talk like Gollum all through the movie. At the end, bite off someone's finger and fall down the stairs.
9. Dress up as old ladies and reenact "The Battle of Helms Deep," Monty Python style.
10. When Denethor lights the fire, shout "Barbecue!"
11. In TTT when the Ents decide to march to war, stand up and shout, "RUN FOREST, RUN!"
12. Every time someone kills an Orc, yell: "That's what I'm Tolkien about!" See how long it takes before you get kicked out of the theatre.
13. During a wide shot of a battle, inquire, "Where's Waldo?"
14. Talk loudly about how you heard that there is a single frame of a nude Elf hidden somewhere in the movie.
15. Start an Orc sing-a-long.
16. Come to the premiere dressed as Frankenfurter and wander around looking terribly confused.
17 When they go in the paths of the dead, wait for a tense moment and shout, "I see dead people!"
18. Imitate what you think a conversation between Gollum, Dobby and Yoda would be like.
19. Release a jar of daddy-long-legs into the theater during the Shelob scene.
20. Wonder out loud if Aragorn is going to run for governor of California.
21. When Shelob comes on, exclaim, "Man!Charlotte's really let herself go!"
Galadriel gone mad! (Score:3, Insightful)
For me, I was only bothered in the first movie by what I would term 64.1: the scene when Frodo offers the Ring to Galadriel.
In the book, Galadriel remains in full control of herself and deliberately shows herself to Frodo as a terrible and powerful queen to illustrate what the Ring would make her into. In the movie, by contrast, it seems as if she is half-swept away by the temptation of the Ring, as she turns into some kind of bogey-monster.
The movie just made her seem a touch too out of control, and it violated her character, for me, as being one of the wisest and fairest of elves.
Other than that, I absolutely loved the first movie and think it the best of the three.
Re:Galadriel gone mad! (Score:3, Insightful)
It was her lack of wisdom---her willfulness and seeking of power, that led her to leave the West and visit Middle-Earth.
Likewise, Arwen is more fair, (consistent with the constant echoes of Beren/Luthien in the Aragorn/Arwen story.).
What Galadriel is is amazingly powerful. Close kin to Feanor, more powerful than any other in Middle Earth save Sauron. More powerful than Elrond (the lore master, the 'wise elf' if you will). More powerful than the Wizards (who were forbidden to use power in their missio
Re:Galadriel gone mad! (Score:3, Interesting)
In the Silmarilion there is some reference to Galadriel and her reasons for coming to Middle Earth, but it is easy to miss in the rest of what is happening. The story is elaborated in other bits of the Christopher Tolkein volumes, but as there are rather a lot of them I
Re:Galadriel gone mad! (Score:3, Informative)
Taking liberties with the story (Score:5, Funny)
Of course, Christians and Jews aren't nearly as fanatical as some of Tolkien's fans.
The Two Towers - Purist Edit (Score:5, Interesting)
The purpose of the edit is to make the movie follow more closely to the original books. "It's amazing the work the editor has done by selectively removing scenes and rearranging them - without messing up the sound synchronisation. Now there are no longer any elves in Helm's Deep, Faramir is a good guy again, and the ents aren't idiots anymore." (tangent3 [slashdot.org])
Major changes (out of about 30 changes totally):
Ents don't refuse to attack Isengard
Elves do not come to Helm's Deep
Gimli is no longer a dwarf clown
Faramir does not decide to take the Ring to Gondor as a "mighty gift"
Frodo does not attempt to give the Ring to Nazgul
Arwen stays in Middle-Earth
Aragorn doesn't fall from a cliff
e rs-The_ Purist_Edit.avi|729462784|ec0671172619e490d7b0ea6b 5278468c|/
E dit-Traile r.avi|14997504|965c013e991ee246d63d45ea71954c4d|/
Here's the ed2k link:
ed2k://|file|Lord_of_the_Rings-The_Two_Tow
Here is the trailer:
ed2k://|file|The_Two_Towers-The_Purist_
Alternatively, get the trailer from here [www.lut.fi].
More information in the ShareReactor forum [sharereactor.com].
The case for Arwen++ (Score:4, Insightful)
But I understand why Jackson gave Arwen such an expanded role, and I think it was justified. I adore Tolkein as much as the next nerd, but he really had a blind spot for female characters. You could count the number of significant female characters in The Hobbit and The Rings combined on the fingers of one hand. As the article writer himself points out, Arwen only had one line in the books. And the women weren't exactly well-rounded I-can-identify-with-her characters. They were mostly just archetypes. (Yeah, a lot of the men were too, but the key (male) protagonists had some depth to them.)
I'll grant you that getting to see Orlando and Viggo strut about gives the films some female appeal. (They were certainly a treat to these guy-loving eyes.) But having another substantial woman character acting among the men makes it seem less like Middle Earth is a world where not only the dwarves' women look like men, but the other races' as well.
Re:The case for Arwen++ (Score:4, Informative)
Eh? I never understood people who claimed this. What about Luthien Tinuviel? Not only was she an important character in the first age, but she was the only one to have confronted MORGOTH (yes, the Big Evil One himself), knocked him out, helped Beren steal a silmaril from his crown AND appealed to the Valar to bring them both to life again! She defeated MORGOTH, for crying out loud. Sauron was just Morgoth's flunkie, and she totally kicked his sorry ass too! If that's not a powerful female character, I don't know what else to say.
What good are city guards? (Score:3, Insightful)
In the movie he just seems like a mean old fool. And what where the city guard doing when Gandalf conked Denethor on the head? All looking the other way? Obviously their opinion of their lord wasn't that much higher than Jackson's.
I forgave the many changes of the first two movies (made particularly better by the extended editions), some where necessary to adapt the book to a movie, a few even enhanced the story to some degree (as far as a movie going audience was concerned). But the third movie just really bugged me every time I watched it. I am hoping it can be redeemed by the extended edition, but I expect it wont.
It's official (Score:5, Funny)
She will never be able to use that line again, for it will have lost all meaning.
Gandalf the Violent? (Score:3, Insightful)
The silly thing about a list like this is that it's just pointing out the inevitable. When a story goes from one medium to another, from words to action, you have to abbreviate things and get certain points across about characters in a different way. In the book, it's clear that Gandalf is powerful and not to be triffled with and we know this because Tolkien has page after page to get that point across. In the film, where action is key not words, it must be demonstrated and in a way that doesn't seem too pedantic. So, Gandalf reaching through the window and pulling Sam through violently demonstrates that he's far more powerful than he looks. In a sense, doing it that way remains more faithful to what Tolkien wrote than slavishly adhering to each and every detail.
Unnatural Elves (Score:4, Interesting)
By contrast in the book the elves are "supernatural" meaning that they are extremely natural. Their magic is one that is in concert with the earth, not alien to it. In the books the elves are characterized as more at home in Middle Earth than other races.
Much Too Hasty... (Score:4, Informative)
From the article: 69. Saruman enjoys the pipeweed of the Halflings (ROTK p.324). Jackson has Saruman tell Gandalf that his wits have been dulled by Halfling leaf as if he doesn't smoke it himself and, it might be added, even though there is pipeweed amongst the flotsam and jetsam of Isengard.
If I'm not mistaken, this line was actually lifted from Unfinished Tales, the rambling colletion of bits and pieces that Tokien never hammered into stories worthy of publication. I recall this line being spoken by Saruman to Gandalf in the presence of the other members of the Council of the Wise when they were meeting to discuss the matter of the Rings of Power.
From The Encyclopedia of Arda [glyphweb.com]: When the Council debated the Rings of Power, Saruman claimed that his researches showed that the One Ring had been lost forever. It was later shown that he did not believe this, however, and was searching for it himself, having secretly rebelled against the Council.
Saruman was attempting to discredit Gandalf (they were in disagreement on this matter) by exposing his affinity for hobbits. The quotation was something like: "Your wits have been dulled by your love of the halflings' leaf."
I might be wrong about the timing, but I'm pretty sure I had read the line before I heard it delivered in FOTR. In the end, it ended up being one of my favourite lines :)
Aha, found it (Score:4, Insightful)
I R some more of TFA
"Jackson, in my opinion, commits another Major Mistake in his handling of the Faramir storyline."
So the article writer's big three complaints are too much Arwen, no scouring of the Shire, and the Faramir storyline. In all I'd say Jackson did pretty well if that's the worst anyone can come up with.