FILM: The Return Of The King - Peter Jackson (2003)

[BloodBoal 7,538]

 

The Return Of The King - Peter Jackson (2003)

 

The theatrical cut.

And so the journey ended with The Return Of The King... After the relative disappointment of The Two Towers (with which I wasn't as pleased as I was with The Fellowship Of The Ring), I surprisingly wasn’t particularly anxious before the release of the last part of the trilogy. For some reason, I was convinced it was going to be great. I remember watching the preview for that film on the TTT DVD, with Elijah Wood claiming "It’s better than the first two combined", and after that, seeing the teaser, and later on, the trailer, and then I knew... There was no doubt in my mind the film that was coming to theaters was going to be very special... Very special indeed...

 

And right from the start, I was proven right. The opening of the film is one of my favourite moments in it. Starting the grand climax of this story of epic proportions with the shot of a worm was a stroke of genius. It is something completely unexpected, but it works so well. The whole pastoral, bucolic opening sequence actually makes for a great contrast for what is about to follow (both in said sequence and in the film as a whole) and I believe was the most perfect way to open that film. I absolutely love it, and the music that accompanies it as well. And the visuals, too. Ah, yes, the visuals. As some of you might recall (those of you who have read my review of The Two Towers), I wasn’t a huge fan of the visual aspect of the second film, which looked too "raw" for my taste (in terms of color, of special effects, etc.). But here, right with the first scene, the film looked much, much better (well, there's that underwater shot that looks like bad, but bad-looking underwater shots seem to be a common thread in PJ movies for some reason). Gorgeous colors there: lots of greens, gold... It looked great. PJ wasn’t afraid of colors anymore. Colors were back!

 

The look of the film is one of the many things I love about it. Always been a fan of everything having to do with Gondor and the design of the armors, buildings, etc. so the fact that most of the film deals with that culture is definitely a plus (always preferred Gondor to Rohan, which is one of the reasons why I prefer that film to The Two Towers). Also, as mentioned above, colors make a grand return in that film: we got green for the Army Of The Dead, red and black for Mordor, white and blue for Gondor, yellow/gold for the Pelennor Fields... Was happy to see the film was not all just grey and blue like The Two Towers! There are also many memorable shots to be found in the film: the one during Faramir’s escape from Osgiliath, showing on one side the dark clouds of Mordor and the Nazgûl in the air and on the other the White Rider and the light coming out of his staff, the silhouette of the Rohirrim hitting the bell during the muster of Rohan, the vertiginous overhead shots during the climb of the stairs of Cirith Ungol, Shelob showing up above Frodo, Aragorn facing the Black Gate as Sauron tries to seduce him, the Eagles arriving at Mount Doom... Jackson was firing on all cylinders with that film. Visually, there isn’t much that bother me here (some of the visual effects may look a bit dodgy, but not as much as some in TTT). Some have mentioned that this film was the first one where PJ  started going a bit mad with bloom (a trend that got much, much worse with The Hobbit trilogy) and I originally agreed with that statement (going by memory), but rewatching the film, it really isn’t that much pronounced and is limited to only some parts: the sequence where there is probably the most bloom is during the Battle Of The Pelennor Fields, and even then, I think it isn’t much of a nuisance, and actually participates in making us feel the conflict has reached really epic, mythical proportions, and what we are seeing now is the stuff of legends. So, for me, it works.

 

Of course, the visuals isn’t the only thing the film has going for it. The Return Of The King is a film of many highlights. MANY. There are few movies in which you can find as many stirring sequences as there are in this one: the arrival at Minas Tirith, the Lighting Of The Beacons, the Muster of Rohan, the Sacrifice of Faramir, Theoden’s speech and the Charge Of The Rohirrim, the White Shores dialogue, Sam coming into his own while fighting Shelob, the whole End Of All Things sequence, the Grey Havens... It is a movie that keeps on giving, that just goes from one inspired moment to the next (with the occasional mishap, quickly forgotten and forgiven given everything that surrounds it). It really is one hell of a cinematic experience, and even can be a bit exhausting because of that (in a good way, that is!). It is not perfect, however, I’ll willingly admit that. It suffers from excessive bloatness from time to time, and you can clearly feel PJ indulging himself in quite a few sequences, now that he was more confident after the success of the two previous film. It was all of course embodied by the sequence in which Legolas kills the Oliphaunt (that one never bothered me much, as by that point in the story, it feels “earned” so to speak: such an heroic deed gives a great idea of the magnitude of the conflict at hand. This is huge, now! Some might say it is over-the-top (it’s hard to deny that) and doesn’t belong here, but it is a “cool moment for the sake of being cool” that works for me). And this bloatness is what made the film stray too far from the book, for some...

 

So this is where we have to discuss the deviations from the book. This film is the most controversial of the three when it comes to the adaptation aspect of it (The Fellowship Of The Ring is probably the most well-received by book fans, and the complaints regarding The Two Towers being mostly limited to the changes done to Faramir's character) The Return Of The King was a bit particular for me, as it was the first film in the trilogy that I watched when I was finally really familiar with the books. Before The Fellowship Of The Ring was released in theaters, I had only read Book I of the first novel (the story didn’t quite grab me, and I blame that mostly on the Bakshi film, which I had seen before reading the book, so I had visuals from it stuck in my mind, and that didn’t work in the book’s favour, unfortunately), and I didn’t remember much from it, so when I saw the film, I couldn’t really evaluate it as an adaptation, and I had no expectations for it as an adaptation, and thus didn’t notice (nor was I bothered) by the changes. By the time The Two Towers was released, I had read the books once (maybe twice), so I noticed mostly the major changes but none annoyed me that much (I could understand the reasoning behind it, even though I would have liked PJ to find a different approach with the case of Faramir. And I was bummed Shelob didn't show up at the end of the film). But when came the time of The Return Of The King, I knew the story much, much better, so this is really the one where I approached it differently, not simply as a film, but as an adaptation. And yes, as much as I loved what the film had to offer, I was disappointed by many of the changes. No Beregond? No Bergil? No Imrahil? What, why? Of course, for someone trying to streamline the story of the book, this seems like one of the most obvious and easy things to cut, so I came to accept that (though I later realized as unimportant as these characters might seem in the great scheme of things, their absence is at the origin of us not really caring much for the Gondorians, which is something I addressed in another post of mine here). But then there were bigger changes than that...

 

First, there’s the Arwen subplot. To be honest, I never gave that one much thought back then, so I didn’t feel particularly annoyed by it (the fact that I didn’t find the Arwen scenes to be as boring as the ones in TTT played a part in that). With time, I’ve come to understand the gripes people have with it, and I guess it now bothers me a bit, but I’m still pretty much indifferent to it. Then, there’s the Denethor situation... That one I was more disappointed with. I do wish they had shown the Palantir, as omitting it created more problems than having it in the film (by then, it had been established what a Palantir was: it wouldn’t have complicated things too much nor would it have taken too much screentime to show it to explain Denethor’s madness. Now the guy just seems like a douchebag just... because). A third major change is everything to do with the Grey Company and the Army Of The Dead. Now, this one is rather funny, because before even watching the film, I was convinced they were gonna have the Army Of The Dead show up at the Fields of the Pelennor, as cinematically, it is the thing that made the most sense to me. If you stick to the book, you have random guys we had never seen before show up, go with Aragorn recruit the Dead to kill some pirates, then leave the Dead there, and finally, during the Battle Of The Pelennor Fields, you have those 200 (or so) men arriving and turning the tide of the battle. I’m not sure the average moviegoer would be OK with that. The most common reaction you’d get would probably be: "Why didn’t they keep the Dead with them?" which is actually something addressed by Gimli in the film, but by that point, the Dead have made a real difference. Having them be summoned just to kill a few pirates would not have made a big impact, in my opinion... There’s another change, which I haven’t seen mentioned anywhere, but which personally kind of bugged me, and that is what happens when the door of Minas Tirith is smashed by Grond. In this particular case, the film takes the complete opposite direction of what happens to the book, and I’m not sure I liked that. That moment in the book, where there is a sudden silence, and the Witch-King slowly rides in the city, with Gandalf facing him, was such an iconic scene that I was at first really disappointed that it had not been included in the film. What the film offered instead made me grin the first time I saw it as it took me a bit by surprise (not necessarily in a bad way, mind you), but the more I think about it, the more I would have liked PJ to stick to the book here. That being said, I ended up being more or less pleased about how he dealt with that face-off in the EE (more on that below), so there is that.

 

And finally, the last major change much debated among fans is Frodo telling Sam to go home, and Frodo facing Shelob’s lair alone. Well, to begin with, many seem to be bothered by the fact that the Shelob's lair sequence was moved from the second film to the third one in the first place. Never considered that a problem, personally. In fact, I think it was a good choice. Remove that from the third film, and you have barely anything to show of Frodo and Sam's journey (just Sam rescuing Frodo in Cirith Ungol, and then the two walking in Mordor to Mount Doom) while there'd be a lot of scenes with the other storylines. Here, there's more balance between each. As for the way Frodo and Sam are separated in the film: this, I’m personally OK with. The way they are separated in the book is not entirely satisfying, and this was much better for many reasons: first, it shows the growing influence of the Ring on Frodo, second it makes the Shelob’s lair sequence more frightening knowing Frodo is going in alone (though the "frightening" part is a bit debatable, I’ll address that bit below), and third, it makes for a badass return for Sam (but I can understand why people hate that change, as they think Sam would never have abandoned Frodo. Ever. And I agree. Wish PJ would have found a way to deal with that more delicately. Maybe, instead of having Sam actually leaving and suddenly deciding to come back after seeing the Lembas bread and realizing Gollum's treachery (hadn't he already realized before that that Gollum was behind all this anyway?), you could have him simply stay where Frodo left him, and after having cried all the tears in his body, putting himself together and realizing he can't leave Frodo alone). Actually, my problem with the Shelob's lair sequence has more to do with the way it was lit: it’s too well lit. It’s supposed to be one of the darkest places of Middle-Earth and that’s how you lit your set? As a result, the sequence was not particularly scary, which is a shame because it would have been a great opportunity to play around with shadows, eyes glowing in the dark, etc. The way it is described in the book is so chilling, it’s a real pity they didn’t capture that in any way in the film. Anyway, all this to say that as an adaptation, I acknowledge the fact that The Return Of The King could be improved upon (in that regard, The Fellowship Of The Ring remains the best of the three).

 

While we're on the topic of things being changed and moved around: it is interesting to note that in this film (much more than in the previous two) many scenes were moved around until late in the game, and it is pretty much unnoticeable for someone who isn’t aware of that fact. The only scene where one could really notice it is when Gandalf rescues Faramir and his men, with Pippin being here for some odd reason (which of course is explained by the fact that this was originally the moment Gandalf and Pippin arrived at Minas Tirith, as most of you already know). I actually thought about that one when rewatching the film, and I suddenly realized something: that meant that the awesome arrival at Minas Tirith with Shore’s fantastic cue and those awesome aerial shots as Gandalf is riding all the way up to the Citadel were originally not going to be in the film! I am so glad PJ changed his mind, because that sequence is one of my favourite in the film. That change is also a good way to spot some of the pick-up scenes in the film: for example, the scene taking place at night between Pippin and Gandalf at Minas Tirith, with them suddenly seeing the light coming from Minas Morgul as the Mordor army is leaving the place, wasn’t originally there either (since Gandalf arrived when Faramir and his men were fleeing from Osgiliath which was invaded by said Mordor army). It’s rather funny to put the pieces together like that and see how the film was shaped as the editing went on.

 

And now, about the score... Ah, the score... Simply put, this is my favourite score of all time (or at least easily Top 3 material). Building on all the thematic material established in the previous two scores, Shore kept on developing his musical landscape and created one gigantic masterpiece that goes through all the emotional spectrum and took us from one impressive setpiece to the next with a mastery of the orchestra that is matched by few other film composers! Much like the film itself, the score has a large number of stunning moments: the lyrical rendition of Gandalf’s theme as he flees from Edoras with Pippin, the majestic grandeur of the Gondor theme statement during the Lighting Of The Beacons (to this day, still one of the best combinations of music and visuals in the history of cinema), followed by the martial Rohan material for the Rohirrim leaving Edoras, the beautiful choral material for Gandalf rescuing Faramir and his men, the chilling string writing in the Shelob’s Lair sequence, the exhilirating heroic music for the “Legolas kills the Oliphaunt” scene... The way all the themes are handled, each one being given the chance to shine, and all beautifully interacting with one another is also one of the best aspects of the score. But ultimately, if I have to give only one reason why this is my favourite of the three is simple: the Gondor theme. That theme is what makes this score, for me. The tragedy of this once beautiful and noble civilization is perfectly encapsulated by this soaring melody that conveys both the idea that Gondor is past its glory days but also that it can still rise to the occasion, for one glorious final stand. And as I previously mentioned, Shore’s theme fills in the void left by the lack of Gondorians in the film for us to relate to (Faramir being unconscious most of the time, and Denethor being a complete mad man). There are no characters to really represent the Gondorians on screen and thus make us care for them, so Shore’s theme takes this responsibility, and does it admirably.

 

My love for the Gondor theme is also the reason why I was always a bit disappointed by how Shore ended this score, with his Wagner homage. Now don’t get me wrong, I like this bit, but the fact that it basically "replaced" one final glorious Gondor theme statement annoys me. By that I mean: it seems clear to me that, had it not been the final film, Shore would have definitely ended the score with a big Gondor theme statement instead of the Wagner cue he wrote to conclude the trilogy. If you look at the two previous score, there is a clear pattern (well, in my opinion). The Fellowship Of The Ring has a clear overarching theme that binds everything together, and that is the Fellowship theme (one could say there’s also the Shire theme, but more on that in a second), the film being of course all about that group. And what do we get at the very end of the score? A big Fellowship theme statement (and right before it, the Shire theme). Next, The Two Towers: the big new theme here of course is the Rohan theme, the film revolving in big part around that people. And what do we get at the end of the score? A big Rohan theme statement. And finally, we have The Return Of The King, with the Gondor theme being the big new thematic idea here (well, it had been introduced in the previous scores, but only in the third one did it really came into its own), and a lot of screentime being devoted to Minas Tirith. And what did we get at the end of the score? NOT a big Gondor theme statement. Of course, you’ll say: "But here, this isn’t just about the end of The Return Of The King, this is end of the trilogy as whole!", and I understand that. But couldn’t Shore have written a big Gondor theme statement followed by his homage to Wagner? I sure wish he did... Anyway, enough about that!

 

Before concluding this review, let’s talk about the theatrical cut. This one still holds up pretty damn well. When compared to the extended cut, it clearly works better in my opinion, though it could have been slightly improved, methinks. There are things that work definitely better in the theatrical cut (the audience not knowing what was the outcome of Aragorn’s encounter with the Army Of The Dead makes for a much more exciting arrival at the battle than in the EE, same regarding the lack of scene with the Rohirrim the moment they depart from Dunharrow to their arrival at Minas Tirith...) but then there are scenes that were kept for the EE that would have made a much bigger impact, had they been included in the theatrical cut: the scene with Gandalf facing the Witch-King (I know not many people like it, but I’m fine with it) and the scene where Frodo and Sam encouter the company of orcs. These are two scenes that are really tense and which really make you consider the quest may fail, so I think it would have been terrific if they had been part of the theatrical cut, for non-book readers to experience them that way (especially the Witch-King scene, set up by a line of dialogue kept in the theatrical cut but with no payoff!). Having them in the EE, which most people watch after having already seen the theatrical cut, robs them of their impact. Apart from that, I think the theatrical cut still stands strong and doesn’t feel like it’s missing anything really important (considering what was included on the EE, that is), apart from Saruman’s death of course, but it goes without saying! Regarding the additions of the extended edition, they fall into two categories: the one that are most welcome (the coronal of silver and gold scene, Merry swearing allegiance to Theoden, Eomer finding Eowyn on the battlefield, Sam seeing the stars shining while in Mordor) and then there are the ones that feel either unnecessary or detrimental to the viewing experience (the whole Paths Of The Dead added footage, the Pirates Of Umbar, Aragorn using the Palantir...). That is why, in my opinion, the best version of the film lies between the theatrical cut and the extended cut. A “partially-extended cut” of sorts.

 

The Return Of The King may not be a flawless film, but it is an awe-inspiring experience nonetheless. A most powerful and magnificent climax to one of the finest trilogies of all time. Whenever people defend a movie that was highly anticipated by fans and ended up being trashed, saying "The expectations were too high anyway! They could never possibly meet these expectations!", I always bring up this film as a proof that it can actually be done. My expectations for that one were sky high, yet it surpassed them. Was it everything I could have hoped for? No, maybe not (some aspects of the books could have been handled more carefully), but it was also many things I couldn’t have hoped for. There is no doubt in my mind that it is one of greatest movies ever made. Compared to The Fellowship Of The Ring, it is probably rougher around the edges, but in a way, that is what makes the experience more visceral and more powerful. Remakes will come and go in years to come, that is almost inevitable, and they may handle some things from the book better, but I doubt any will approach the greatness of this adaptation as a whole. It's not just a case of the stars or planets all being perfectly aligned, it's a case of the whole universe being perfectly aligned when that film was made. You did it, PJ! You're are the True King! Now bring us The Hobbit! It's going to be awesome!

 

9.5/10

 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Worst of the three, but still incredibly satisfying emotionally.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

1 minute ago, Stefancos said:

Worst of the three

 

Wrong. Try again.

[mstrox 6,637]

Thought this review had a natural ending, but then it had four more endings before it was done.  7/10.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Literally the first thing I did when I opened the page was ctrl-f and look for the word "ending."  

 

If there's anything I hate it's people complaining about "too many" endings.  Don't even start with me on that stupid complaint.  Luckily I only found mstrox's joke.

 

I consider this by far the messiest of the LOTR films.  It's sprawling and messy, with more questionable visual effects and performances and continuity errors.  Just a mess!  But it's such an emotional catharsis, and gets so much right, that I forgive it all that.

[John 2,032]

The best of the three, IMO, and one of the greatest works of 21th century cinema. An absolute epic that, despite its sprawling scope, never looses focus on its characters and their journeys.

[KK 3,307]

An epic, in every sense of the word. Few films encapsulate it better. My favourite of the three as well. Most flawed perhaps, but its the one that speaks to my heart the most.

 

This post has reminds me again why we are brothers!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

 

3 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

If there's anything I hate it's people complaining about "too many" endings.  Don't even start with me on that stupid complaint.

 

Never had that problem with the endings (on the contrary), and like you, I think this is a stupid complaint: it seems people simply don't understand this is not just the conclusion of one 3-hour film, this is the conclusion of a 11-hour long story. A 20 minutes long ending doesn't feel like pushing it to me! And if you're invested in the story and cared about the characters, then I don't see why you'd be bothered by this "lengthy" ending: on the contrary, you should be happy so much care has been put into the conclusion to make it satisfying.

 

The thing that always made me smile is that I had a complete opposite reaction compared to people who moaned about the multiple endings: when I first watched the film, with the first fade to white after the Eagles saved Frodo, I was like "Oh, no, they're not going to end the film here, are there? So much more stuff left to show!", and I was happy to see it continue. And after that, there was the fade to black after Frodo sees Sam, and I had the same reaction: "Oh, no, they're not going to end the film here, are there? So much more stuff left to show!". Thankfully, the film continued. And once again, with the shot zooming out of Minas Tirith, and the sweeping Shire theme statement, I was like: "Oh, no, they're not going to end the film here, are there? So much more stuff left to show!", etc. With each "fake" ending, instead of being annoyed, I was relieved!

 

12 minutes ago, KK said:

This post has reminded me why we are brothers!

 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

2 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

 

 

Never had that problem with the endings (on the contrary), and like you, I think this is a stupid complaint: it seems people simply don't understand this is not just the conclusion of one 3-hour film, this is the conclusion of a 11-hour long story. A 20 minutes long ending doesn't feel like pushing it to me! And if you're invested in the story and cared about the characters, then I don't see why you'd be bothered by this "lengthy" ending: on the contrary, you should be happy so much care has been put into the conclusion to make it satisfying.

 

The thing that always made me smile is that I had a complete opposite reaction compared to people who moaned about the multiple endings: when I first watched the film, with the first fade to white after the Eagles saved Frodo, I was like "Oh, no, they're not going to end the film here, are there? So much more stuff left to show!", and I was happy to see it continue. And after that, there was the fade to black after Frodo sees Sam, and I had the same reaction: "Oh, no, they're not going to end the film here, are there? So much more stuff left to show!". Thankfully, the film continued. And once again, with the shot zooming out of Minas Tirith, and the sweeping Shire theme statement, I was like: "Oh, no, they're not going to end the film here, are there? So much more stuff left to show!", etc. With each "fake" ending, instead of being annoyed, I was relieved!

 

 

Those fades to black work so well to me as, like, periods at the end of a sentence.  Always coming after some emotional scene where I almost forget to breathe.  The black screen gives me a chance to let out a breath and re-orient.

[John 2,032]

I think we can all agree that all three films are some of the greatest achievements in cinema history.

[mrbellamy 6,270]

1 hour ago, BloodBoal said:

Never had that problem with the endings (on the contrary), and like you, I think this is a stupid complaint: it seems people simply don't understand this is not just the conclusion of one 3-hour film, this is the conclusion of a 11-hour long story. A 20 minutes long ending doesn't feel like pushing it to me! And if you're invested in the story and cared about the characters, then I don't see why you'd be bothered by this "lengthy" ending: on the contrary, you should be happy so much care has been put into the conclusion to make it satisfying.

 

The thing that always made me smile is that I had a complete opposite reaction compared to people who moaned about the multiple endings: when I first watched the film, with the first fade to white after the Eagles saved Frodo, I was like "Oh, no, they're not going to end the film here, are there? So much more stuff left to show!", and I was happy to see it continue. And after that, there was the fade to black after Frodo sees Sam, and I had the same reaction: "Oh, no, they're not going to end the film here, are there? So much more stuff left to show!". Thankfully, the film continued. And once again, with the shot zooming out of Minas Tirith, and the sweeping Shire theme statement, I was like: "Oh, no, they're not going to end the film here, are there? So much more stuff left to show!", etc. With each "fake" ending, instead of being annoyed, I was relieved!

 

On this point, I do think it's really less about the 20 minutes of epilogue and more about the filmmaking technique itself. I don't think people would have had such a problem with the "extra" (not to me) story if it didn't feel like it was constantly stopping and starting, the fade outs and dissolves and the way the music is always reaching these calm resolutions then building itself up again.

 

Which I think is fair enough but I think to do that Jackson probably would have had to take some emphasis off of certain moments and I love how strongly those scenes are expressed, one after another. I've grown to love it more and more, the use of fades and slow-motion has this really exhausted quality to it that brings so much emotional weight. It's like watching this huge train slowly grinding its way to a halt, or a marathon runner heaving and sighing and dragging their feet somewhere to rest even after they've reached their goal. An electric fan at full speed doesn't immediately stop spinning after you turn it off, a top has to wobble its way to a standstill. It's just physics!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

1 hour ago, Disco Stu said:

Those fades to black work so well to me as, like, periods at the end of a sentence.  Always coming after some emotional scene where I almost forget to breathe.  The black screen gives me a chance to let out a breath and re-orient.

 

1 minute ago, mrbellamy said:

On this point, I do think it's really less about the 20 minutes of epilogue and more about the filmmaking technique itself. I don't think people would have had such a problem with the "extra" (not to me) story if it didn't feel like it was constantly stopping and starting, the fade outs and dissolves and the way the music is always reaching these calm resolutions then building itself up again.

 

Which I think is fair enough but I think to do that Jackson probably would have had to take some emphasis off of certain moments and I love how strongly those scenes are expressed, one after another. I've grown to love it more and more, the use of fades and slow-motion has this really exhausted quality to it that brings so much emotional weight. It's like watching this huge train slowly grinding its way to a halt, or a marathon runner heaving and sighing and dragging their feet somewhere to rest even after they've reached their goal. An electric fan at full speed doesn't immediately stop spinning after you turn it off, a top has to wobble its way to a standstill. It's just physics!

 

Well-said. Plus, each fade to black (or other similar technique seemingly annoucing the end of the film) also indicates the end of a particular part of the story, in my opinion.

 

Fade to white after the Eagles save Frodo: the end of the Quest of the Ring.

 

Fade to black after Frodo sees Sam: the end of their separate journey.

 

The camera zooming out of Minas Tirith: the end of the story of the third film, as well as the end of the Fellowship's journey.

 

Fade to white after the Grey Havens sequence: the end of the 4 Hobbits' journey.

 

Final fade to black after Sam goes home: the end of the LOTR trilogy.

[Dixon Hill 4,232]

The ending is done perfectly.  I am glad JWFan is wise enough to see this!

[Jim Ware 525]

22 hours ago, BloodBoal said:

I actually thought about that one when rewatching the film, and I suddenly realized something: that meant that the awesome arrival at Minas Tirith with Shore’s fantastic cue and those awesome aerial shots as Gandalf is riding all the way up to the Citadel were originally not going to be in the film! I am so glad PJ changed his mind, because that sequence is one of my favourite in the film. 

 

It was in the film as originally scored - Gandalf ascended Minas Tirith to see Denethor immediately after meeting Faramir in the courtyard.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Really? I wonder how that would have worked out. So, there would have been the discussion between Faramir and Gandalf about Frodo going through the Morgul Vale, and suddenly, Gandalf riding all the way up to Minas Tirith with the music suddenly soaring? Maybe in the original composition, the music kept on playing during the Gandalf/Faramir discussion, to keep the momentum going? Though I'm guessing that wasn't the case, since the music as heard in the track Osgiliath Invaded presents the original composition with Gandalf's arrival music, yet features a clean ending after the very last Gondor theme statement... (though, of course, it's possible it was meant to segue directly into another cue which would have lead to the music for Gandalf's ride after that. But I doubt that.).

 

Makes me also realize the Minas Tirith track on the OST basically sticks to the original edit of those scenes, with the music for Gandalf's ride to the Citadel appearing right after the music for the invasion of Osgiliath. Interesting!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

11 hours ago, TheGreyPilgrim said:

The ending is done perfectly.  I am glad JWFan is wise enough to see this!

 

Yes! The ending is wonderful. I can't believe people stood up once the screen went black on the shot of Frodo and Sam surrounded by lava!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

"Well, Ring destroyed! Time to go home!"

[Nick1Ø66 4,687]

Great review, as have been all your comments in this series.

 

ROTK is the least of three great films. That is to say, it's an outstanding film in its own right, but if it must be compared to the other two, I'd put it last. Fellowship is damn near flawless, and TTT, while not perfect, is close behind.  ROTK, on the other hand, has some narrative and character flaws and begins to show some of the hubris and indulgence that later plagued Jackson in The Hobbit.

 

The issues are mostly minor, but since they're being compared to the perfection of the first two, they stand out. Off the top of my head (and while I know your review is of the theatrical, I'm using the EE as reference, as it's the only one I watch).
 

• The second "this army" gag with the army of the dead coming out of nowhere. It worked the first time when they board the pirate ship, but falls flat the second time at Pellanor. And the EE almost messes the gag up entirely the first time by extending the scene past Aragon's "what say you" to include the ridiculous mountain of falling skulls. Once the undead agree to fight for him, the punchline to the reveal is undermined. I understand this is only an issue in the EE, but to me everything past "what say you" was unnecessary and ruins the drama of the scene.
• I disagree with you about Sam abandoning Frodo. After making a huge deal about Sam promising Mr. Gandalf that he'd never abandon Mr. Frodo, he does. Why? Because an out of his mind Mr. Frodo tells him to. Even though Sam knows Gollum is a liar and murderer, he leaves his friend to the mercy of this cutthroat. At most, Sam would follow them in secret, not scamper down the mountain crying. And what makes him come back up? Finding the discarded bread. Which Sam knew back on the ledge Gollum was responsible for. What, knowing Gollum tossed some bread made him REALLY angry? As opposed to hearing with his own ears that Gollum was planning on killing them both? I don't buy it. I've generally gone along with the changes to some of the character's character (e.g. Faramir), but this was a change in Sam's character, towards the end, just to suit the needs of the scene, that IMO didn't work (in context of the character).  All that said, I agree with you regarding Frodo's actions...they do aptly demonstrate the Ring's growing influence on Frodo. It's the way they had Sam react to that I take issue with.
• Tying Arwen's fate to the fate of the Ring. Ugh. As if the fate of Middle-Earth hanging in the balance wasn't enough, Aragorn (and the audience) must be given additional motivation to care about the ring getting destroyed. Completely unnecessary, especially when the beat in the film at this point is Aragorn finally coming to terms with who he is ("become who you were born to be") and what he's supposed to do.
• Related to this, Arwen "surprising" Aragorn at his coronation. What, sometime between the ring getting destroyed and becoming King Aragorn didn't ask someone "Hey, whatever happened to that elf girl I liked? Is she still around?"   After they made such a big deal of tying Arwen's fate to the Ring, this scene just seemed kind of off to me. And the kiss...ugh. In another movie it works fine, but here? Feels forced.
• Gandalf murdering Denathor. Enough said.
• Legolas superheroics & cartoon violence. In Fellowship it was cool, in TTT they knew they were on to something so upped in a bit, but by the time they got to ROTK is was out of hand...and a said preview of what we were to get in DOS & TBOTFA.
• I'll forgive the early 2000's CGI, not much they can do about that. But the bright, slick colour scheme they chose for this film was in contrast to the lovely, natural hues of Fellowship and gritty earth tones of TTT. It gives it a kind of unrealistic, "fantasy" feel that continued on into The Hobbit. 

 

Wow. If it sounds like I hate this film, I don't, I love it. There are too many well known good things about the film to mention, and you've done it here. These are mostly small complaints and the film is still brilliant and contains some of my favourite moments in the trilogy..."You bow to no one" gives me a lump in my throat every time, and Frodo's bittersweet homecoming is pitch perfect.  Shore is masterful. There are more "highs" in the film than there are in TTT, and possibly Fellowship.  Those are just offset a bit by the flaws. Though as I said, these flaws only stand out in contrast to the sheer perfection of the first two, and they're small quibbles.

 

As for the so-called "multiple endings", if that's what they are, I don't mind them and in fact love them. They're toned perfectly, and frankly I never want the film to end.

 

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Good post Nick. I agree.

 

ROTK is an outstanding final part of the LOTR film trilogy, but not very good as an adaptation of the book. 

[BloodBoal 7,538]

On 4/18/2017 at 12:28 PM, Nick1066 said:

The second "this army" gag with the army of the dead coming of nowhere. It worked the first time when they board the pirate ship, but falls flat the second time at Pellanor. And the EE almost messes the gag up entirely the first time by extending the scene past Aragon's "what say you" to include the ridiculous mountain of falling skulls. Once the undead agree to fight for him, the punchline to the reveal is undermined. I understand this is only an issue in the EE, but to me everything past "what say you" was unnecessary and ruins the drama of the scene.

 

Yep. I don't like any of the additional scenes with the Army Of The Dead in the EE. The theatrical cut works much better when it comes to that subplot (well, maybe I would have liked them to show more of their journey in that place before meeting the army, but something different than what Jackson gave us, with Gimli's antics and all that stuff).

 

On 4/18/2017 at 12:28 PM, Nick1066 said:

I disagree with you about Sam abandoning Frodo. After making a huge deal about Sam promising Mr. Gandalf that he'd never abandon Mr. Frodo, he does. Why? Because an out of his mind Mr. Frodo tells him to. Even though Sam knows Gollum is a liar and murderer, he leaves his friend to the mercy of this cutthroat. At most, Sam would follow them in secret, not scamper down the mountain crying. And what makes him come back up? Finding the discarded bread. What, knowing Gollum tossed some bread made him REALLY angry? As opposed to hearing with his own ears that Gollum was planning on killing them both? I don't buy it. I've generally gone along with the changes to some of the character's character (e.g. Faramir), but this was a change in Sam's character, towards the end, just to suit the needs of the scene, that IMO didn't work (in context of the character).  All that said, I agree with you regarding Frodo's actions...they do aptly demonstrate the Ring's growing influence on Frodo. It's the way they had same react to that I take issue with.

 

Oh, but I don't entirely disagree with you. Let me put this way: I'm OK with them separating the two characters, but I'm not OK with how they did it. As I said in my review, the reason Jackson gives for Sam to go back doesn't work (he sees the Lembas bread, and suddenly decides to go back? Surely he knew right from the start Gollum had tossed away the bread). A better way to deal with that maybe would have been to have Sam follow Frodo discreetly: that way, the characters would still have been separated in a way (with maybe Sam losing track of Frodo in Shelob's lair), but you wouldn't have Sam abandoning Frodo. Sure, not a perfect solution, but hey, didn't put much thought into it!

 

On 4/18/2017 at 12:28 PM, Nick1066 said:

Tying Arwen's fate to the fate of the Ring. Ugh. As if the fate of Middle-Earth hanging in the balance wasn't enough, Aragorn (and the audience) must be given additional motivation to care about the ring getting destroyed. Completely unnecessary, especially when the beat in the film at this point is Aragorn finally coming to terms with who he is ("become who you were born to be") and what he's supposed to do.

 

I can understand that, because frankly there's not much of a reason (if any) given as to why suddenly her fate is tied to the Ring's, but it doesn't bother me that much because there isn't that much screentime devoted to it (there's only the sequence in Rivendell and then when Aragorn is given Anduril, but after that it's never mentioned again), and is mostly used as an incentive for Elrond to give Aragorn Elendil's sword. It's a rather clumsy story device, yes, but it's not hugely detrimental to the film.

 

On 4/18/2017 at 12:28 PM, Nick1066 said:

Related to this, Arwen "surprising" Aragorn at his coronation. What, sometime between the ring getting destroyed and becoming King Aragorn didn't ask someone "Hey, whatever happened to that elf girl I liked? Is she still around?"   After they made such a big deal of tying Arwen's fate to the Ring, this scene just seemed kind of off to me. And the kiss...ugh. In another movie it works fine, but here? Feels forced.

 

Never gave that one much thought to be honest.  To me it doesn't look like Aragorn is "surprised" to see Arwen here, rather stunned, after all those adventures he's been through, to finally be able to see her again.

 

The kiss... It does feel a bit Hollywood-ian (not a particularly kingly kiss!), but hey, after all they've been through, I can let that one slide...

 

On 4/18/2017 at 12:28 PM, Nick1066 said:

I'll forgive the early 2000's CGI, not much they can do about that. But the bright, slick colour scheme they chose for this film was in contrast to the gritty naturalism of the first two. It gives it a kind of unrealistic, "fantasy" feel that continued on into The Hobbit.

 

Never had a problem with the colour scheme of that one (at least I don't think it's as pronounced as in The Hobbit). As I said, I was actually glad to see colors being back after the rather dull looking The Two Towers in that regard. The only two things I could understand people having a problem with are the green glow of the Army Of The Dead (doesn't really look frightening, does it?) and the golden look of the Pelennor Fields. The rest doesn't strike me as particularly "unrealistic".

 

On 4/18/2017 at 12:28 PM, Nick1066 said:

There are more "highs" in the film than there are in TTT, and possibly Fellowship.  Those are just offset a bit by the flaws.

 

Actually, I don't see it that way. To me, the fact that there are so many "highs" help overlooking the flaws (which isn't as much the case with The Two Towers).

[Nick1Ø66 4,687]

5 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

To me, the fact that there are so many "highs" help overlooking the flaws (which isn't as much the case with The Two Towers).

 

True! The highs do make me forgive and overlook the flaws. Let me put it this way...the highs are part of the reason I regard the film as highly as I do, but the flaws keep it from being at the level of the first two (particularly FOTR).

[John 2,032]

I agree that FOTR is the better film (though my personal preference will always go to ROTK); in FOTR, there is almost nothing that feels off, aside from a few quick-zoom camera shots in some of the action scenes that haven't aged very well.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

It's the best adaptation too!

[John 2,032]

I agree, just some of the aspects of the cinematography haven't aged very well.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Objectively, The Fellowship Of The Ring is definitely the best film and the best adaptation of the three.

 

The Two Towers is OK both as a film and as an adaptation (the Faramir/Osgiliath situation excepted), though it is uneven.

 

The Return Of The King is the worst adaptation (though I personally think they did an admirable job overall, given the complexity of the book) but a superb, even if bloated at times, film. I've come to realize that people who critizise it the most are fans of the book, generally bringing forth the argument that "it's better in the book", which is (for the most part) true, I don't deny that, but that's overlooking its undeniable qualities as a film (disregarding the adaptation part).

[Jay 37,268]

Sam actually turning away and going down the stairs is an unforgivable sin!

 

Nice review BB and nice response @Nick1066!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I agree. It doesn't work. Not if you know the books, not if you've only seen the previous 2 films.

 

Least of the three!

[John 2,032]

Just because the film doesn't completely line up with the book doesn't make it a bad movie. The film certainly is a remarkable landmark in cinema history, and the most visually stunning and emotionally powerful of the three.

[mstrox 6,637]

I've read the books and seen the prior movies, and never really had a problem with it

[John 2,032]

Let us not forget this film won 11 Oscars.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The trilogy won 11 Oscars as far as I'm concerned 

[John 2,032]

17!

[Jay 37,268]

I will always like the first film and score the best, but ROTK undoubtedly has many great highlights (film and score)

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The score is absolutely phenomenal! Nothing that came after has come close. 

 

End of an era, imo.

[Jay 37,268]

It's hard to find anything written after 2003 I love as much as all the brilliant scores that came out between 1975 and 2003.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The Golden Age of film music.

[John 2,032]

The score for ROTK was the last great fantasy film score. Never again will we hear anything like it.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

23 minutes ago, JohnSolo said:

The score for ROTK was the last great fim score. Never again will we hear anything like it.

 

Fixed!

[John 2,032]

 

 

"Fim score"...?

 

 

And my previous statement was correct.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

The Return Of The King marked the end of truly great blockbusters (the ones that knew how to balance properly practical effects and CG effects (though some might say that one already started going overboard with CG) as well as balance properly action sequences and more intimate character moments) as well as the end of truly great film scores (and when I say "great", I mean "GREAT", not just "very good"), the ones that make you forget you're just listening to music, the ones that sweep you off your feet and transport you into a whole new universe and take you on a musical rollercoaster of emotions only to leave you completely exhausted but also completely satisfied by the end of it!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yes! ROTK was an emotionally exhaustive experience.

[John 2,032]

I'll never forget the experience of watching ROTK (or any of the other LOTR films, for that matter) for the first time. Great memories.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Nick1Ø66 4,687]

I saw ROTK the first time in Amsterdam when I spent Christmas there that year. One of the most memorable cinematic experience of my life.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

2 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

I saw ROTK the first time in Amsterdam when I spent Christmas there that year. One of the most memorable cinematic experience of my life.

 

Was it because you got stoned out of your mind?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Thats such a cliche!

[Disco Stu 15,495]

In my defense, many many many of my viewings of the LOTR films I was stoned out of my mind (back in like 2004-07). Just not in Amsterdam.

[Dixon Hill 4,232]

I've only done that once, but man oh man, I felt such a fantastic understanding of Tolkien's ideas.  Also felt like I could see exactly how the subtle "magic" of Middle-Earth worked.  I recall the Lothlórien sequence as being really stimulating in that direction.  Wish I could remember what the hell I was thinking, it had something to do with the water and the Elves' minds being somewhat slippery in the flow of time....

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Interesting....

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I remember my friends and I thought it would be a great idea to get super stoned before going to see Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix the first time.  It was not.  That movie is pretty boring sober.  Stoned, I just fell asleep.

 

I had quit smoking by the time The Hobbit films started coming out.  I wonder if they'd be better under the influence....