Howard Shore's THE LORD OF THE RINGS

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

could be.

Or Cameron.. when he does Avatar 2 & 3

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[KK 3,307]

And Lucas will buy PJ and then sell them all to Fox for a few more billions!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[gkgyver 1,645]

This should be Blofeld's cat in the next Bond movie.

I'm still mad they cut the line that was in the trailer.

"We will see the Shire again, Pippin"

I guess PJ thought it was more interesting to reinsert the skulls avalanche in the extended edition instead of this.

No, you see, PJ reinserts things that he finds fun to put back in. Skull avalanche = fun. Good lines = girl stuff to please his wife.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[gkgyver 1,645]

I'm still mad they cut the line that was in the trailer.

"We will see the Shire again, Pippin"

More than this, I would have loved it had he included the shot of Pippin holding a crying Merry in his arms at the Black Gate after Mt. Doom exploded.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,359]

I hate how much ROTK changed from 2001 to 2003. Would kill to see the original rough cut

[Brónach 1,302]

Me too.

Still, some of my problems with it are already in the script. I find FOTR, with some specific exceptions, to be a magnificent representation of the first two books, but by contrast I can't get past the missed opportunities in ROTK.

Take the scene with Mouth of Sauron, for example. What's the point of that scene when telling the story in chronological order? If we're not using Tolkien's cliffhangers we might as well not use those scenes that served the point of setting up a cliffhanger.

[KK 3,307]

Despite its flaws, it's still my favourite of the films. Such a magnificent finale to the trilogy.

[Brónach 1,302]

Bah.

I think The Hobbit trilogy could be better.

[KK 3,307]

Do you guys honestly have that low an opinion of the film?

There are tons of little quips I have with the whole trilogy, but its hard not to love ROTK. It's truly an epic of the highest order (more so than the other films).

[Brónach 1,302]

I'll be honest: it's one of the films that have really shaken me to the core. But, over time, my list of quips with it has been growing and now it would be endless.

[Jay 37,359]

Oh I love all 3 films, but I don't love ROTK nearly as much as I love the first two

[A. A. Ron 1,742]

That's odd to me as I felt that ROTK was as good as it possibly could be, given how badly they screwed up the ending for TTT.

[Jay 37,359]

What aspects of the ending are you referring to?

What I dislike about the TTT film is the made-up stuff (Aragorn falling off a cliff and having visions of Arwen for a while before being reunited with everyone, Elrond and Galadriel having a psychic mid-movie recap, and Faramir taking Frodo and Sam to Osgiliath). A lot of other strange things like the change to Faramir's character were kinda fixed by the EE.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Jason, everything about LOTR is made up.

[Wojo 2,453]

He means made up by the scriptwriters instead of Tolkien!

If Frodo rubbed the ring four times to the left, six to the right, and three to the left while muttering the incantation "in canis corpore transmuto" to turn into a giant dog, which systematically summoned a giant dirigible to transport him directly to Orodruin, it would be no less "made up."

[A. A. Ron 1,742]

What aspects of the ending are you referring to?

What I dislike about the TTT film is the made-up stuff (Aragorn falling off a cliff and having visions of Arwen for a while before being reunited with everyone, Elrond and Galadriel having a psychic mid-movie recap, and Faramir taking Frodo and Sam to Osgiliath). A lot of other strange things like the change to Faramir's character were kinda fixed by the EE.

Most of those changes bothered me too. If they had left them out, the film could have ended as the novel did; with Shelob defeated, Frodo being carried into Mordor, and Sam left alone with the ring. That's what I would have preferred. It's possible this would have also granted the film makers enough time to include the defeat of Saruman in the Shire at the end of ROTK.

[Jay 37,359]

Oh, I dunno about that. All those made-up scenes amount to maybe 20, 30 at the most minutes of screen time. While in ROTK from their first scene at the beginning of the movie till the end of the Shelob sequence is likely what, 45 minutes of screen time?

[Faleel 5,347]

Oh, I dunno about that. All those made-up scenes amount to maybe 20, 30 at the most minutes of screen time. While in ROTK from their first scene at the beginning of the movie till the end of the Shelob sequence is likely what, 45 minutes of screen time?

I did an edit once, I cut out alot, I never finished it of course, ended up at the end of "Flight from Edoras".

[A. A. Ron 1,742]

Oh, I dunno about that. All those made-up scenes amount to maybe 20, 30 at the most minutes of screen time. While in ROTK from their first scene at the beginning of the movie till the end of the Shelob sequence is likely what, 45 minutes of screen time?

Sounds about right, but don't forget that a decent amount of those 45 minutes show what Gandalf and the others were up to in the first few chapters of the ROTK novel. As such, these scenes belong in the third film. If I'm not mistaken, the only scenes that would have to be moved to TTT are the ones that directly involve Frodo and Sam. Sound a bit more reasonable?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,359]

Oh, I dunno about that. All those made-up scenes amount to maybe 20, 30 at the most minutes of screen time. While in ROTK from their first scene at the beginning of the movie till the end of the Shelob sequence is likely what, 45 minutes of screen time?

Sounds about right, but don't forget that a decent amount of those 45 minutes show what Gandalf and the others were up to in the first few chapters of the ROTK novel. As such, these scenes belong in the third film. If I'm not mistaken, the only scenes that would have to be moved to TTT are the ones that directly involve Frodo and Sam. Sound a bit more reasonable?

My 45 minute figure WAS for just the Frodo/Sam/Gollum scenes. If you just look at the entire movie as a whole, its over 2 hours in until the Shelob sequence is over

[A. A. Ron 1,742]

Ah, it's clearly been too long since I've seen the film!

[mrbellamy 6,286]

Most of those changes bothered me too. If they had left them out, the film could have ended as the novel did; with Shelob defeated, Frodo being carried into Mordor, and Sam left alone with the ring. That's what I would have preferred. It's possible this would have also granted the film makers enough time to include the defeat of Saruman in the Shire at the end of ROTK.

The thing that always seems to get left out of these types of discussions is structure. It's not just a simple matter of duration, where if only 20 minutes of non-canon had been snipped from the middle, then the Saruman scene could have been thrown in to pad it back to 180 minutes. The natural breaking point of the story -- as Jackson et al realized it for cinema -- is Forth Eolingas. There's a concrete, dramatic sense of resolution in the way that was executed and -- paired with the Osgiliath stuff -- it gives a sense that the film has reached its natural conclusion and is about to close. Adding more than the relatively brief coda with Frodo/Sam/Gollum in the forest would have caused the film to overstay its welcome, because it already reached the highest emotional point a long time ago.

It's the same reason people get annoyed with the multiple endings of ROTK. I tend to excuse it in that instance since it's wrapping up the trilogy and as a fan, I appreciate the long goodbye, but it's a valid complaint. Even Fran Walsh concedes in the commentary that they might have misjudged the structure of that film, considering the destruction of the ring feels like the real end of the film, when it should have been the Grey Havens. That's such a difficult, probably impossible thing to reconcile, though, that I'm willing to cut them some slack.

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

Adding more than the relatively brief coda with Frodo/Sam/Gollum in the forest would have caused the film to overstay its welcome, because it already reached the highest emotional point a long time ago.

That's what the animated Bakshi movie does, actually. Comes out of the blue every time I watch it.

[Brónach 1,302]

The multiple endings of ROTK are fixed using the Scouring of the Shire idea. Done that way, it's a long goodbye but more enternaining, and you can wrap up things that hadn't been solved yet, and the appearance of Saruman in the Shire can be a fun surprise.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Quintus 5,399]

The multiple endings of ROTK are fixed using the Scouring of the Shire idea. Done that way, it's a long goodbye but more enternaining, and you can wrap up things that hadn't been solved yet, and the appearance of Saruman in the Shire can be a fun surprise.

Sticking an extended plot scenario on the end of the ROTK film adaption would have been a complete disaster. Only nonsensical fans of the book who haven't a clue argue otherwise.

[Brónach 1,302]

I was thinking on a single scene more like an extended plot scenario. We are on the Shire, on a tabern or anything, being happy and sappy like in ROTK, then Saruman suddenly reveals himself being there, angry with these small hobbits who suddenly came from nowhere and changed everything from the path that everything was supposed to take, and we are suprised because we had almost forgotten about him! But he dies. After this point the tone changes to be much more somber and reflective leading directly into a more explicit Grey Havens. Synthesis.

.

[Quintus 5,399]

That would have been a complete cop-out, Chaac.

[Brónach 1,302]

Yes.

But I wouldn't know what to do with Saruman. Any solution for this character rubs me the wrong way. When I read TLOTR, I hated the part of the Scouring of the Shire just like BloodBoal commented. But when I saw TROK I hated the Saruman scene in it. I remain unconvinced either way.

Here's another scene I don't like from the film: the scene when Frodo wakes up.

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

Sticking an extended plot scenario on the end of the ROTK film adaption would have been a complete disaster. Only nonsensical fans of the book who haven't a clue argue otherwise.

The actual Scouring isn't a extended plot scenario but the resolution of the core story. But I agree that hardly anyone would have accepted it at the end of the film.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Brónach 1,302]

[Incanus 5,714]

I just perused the Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien this morning and came across his letter to the company and screen writer trying to put together some kind of script for a film project way back in the day and how this poor writer received very precise and at times crushingly critical comments on his job. Tolkien obviously guarded some elements of the tale with pride and care as only an author would and people often forget how aware of all the elements he was in his novel, all the meanings, themes and ideas. In all good conscience I could not call the writer's interpretations or decisions good on any level and Tolkien really harps him on it continually. Which led to wonder what would Tolkien say about PJs films if he were alive today. Would he think they captured the essential material or would he lament the absence of Tom Bombadil and Barrow Downs or the way the Elves arrive at the Helm's Deep or the way Saruman was dispatched or the missing of the Scouring of the Shire. For he seems to understand the needs of adaptation but also when film should not diverge from the original in attempt to improve it.

[Quintus 5,399]

Sticking an extended plot scenario on the end of the ROTK film adaption would have been a complete disaster. Only nonsensical fans of the book who haven't a clue argue otherwise.

The actual Scouring isn't a extended plot scenario but the resolution of the core story. But I agree that hardly anyone would have accepted it at the end of the film.

Absolutely, the 'personal' Battle of Bywater is intrinsic to the overarching story, but yes; in the language of film it would have been nigh on impossible to make it an accepted 'extended' plot development to audiences with sore bums.

[Incanus 5,714]

Sticking an extended plot scenario on the end of the ROTK film adaption would have been a complete disaster. Only nonsensical fans of the book who haven't a clue argue otherwise.

The actual Scouring isn't a extended plot scenario but the resolution of the core story. But I agree that hardly anyone would have accepted it at the end of the film.

Absolutely, the 'personal' Battle of Bywater is intrinsic to the overarching story, but yes; in the language of film it would have been nigh on impossible to make it an accepted 'extended' plot development to audiences with sore bums.

Indeed. It works in the book as kind of a longer epilogue or a way of showing the effects of war and the growth of the Hobbits through their ordeal but in terms of cinema with 10 different endings already before that it would not have worked.

[Brónach 1,302]

Then what the hell should be done with Saruman?

Maybe they could have made that he is left alone in his tower, bitter about everything, thinking on whatever. Maybe it's not that important.

[Faleel 5,347]

I really think the multiple ending thing would have been more easily avoided if they had had Intermissions in the middle of the films.

(and I never felt the multiple ending thing,...okay maybe when the screen goes black and they are on the rock..)

[Quintus 5,399]

Then what the hell should be done with Saruman?

Nothing, Chaac. He was already dispatched in a way which was perfectly adequate, for the films.

You seem very interested in making significant changes to lots of films.

[Incanus 5,714]

Then what the hell should be done with Saruman?

Maybe they could have made that he is left alone in his tower, bitter about everything, thinking on whatever. Maybe it's not that important.

Tolkien actually suggested this to a screen writer when a movie was planned at one point and the writer had bungled that section in his opinion. That Saruman should have remained in Orthanc. But Tolkien had a different function for the character in the novel. He was there to show that evil is not something you can destroy once and for all and that evil lives on and has to be fought continually and that even a person without an enormous power can devise devastating evil if he wills to do so and this evil is no less than what Sauron might have achieved in the scale of the Hobbits.

But I consider the film version as abrupt as it comes at the beginning fo the third movie, a nice homage to the original end of the character, done in the same spirit as it is Grima who stabs him to death in a fit of desperate and bitter self loathing and rage.

[Marian Schedenig 8,193]

Would he think they captured the essential material or would he lament the absence of Tom Bombadil and Barrow Downs or the way the Elves arrive at the Helm's Deep or the way Saruman was dispatched or the missing of the Scouring of the Shire. For he seems to understand the needs of adaptation but also when film should not diverge from the original in attempt to improve it.

I've read that letter once, though I don't have Letters yet, and as far as I recall, his main complaints were about when the proposed script contradicted his core concepts or the inner logic of his world. As such, I'm pretty sure he would despise those bits which I also consider major offences: Primarily Gandalf knocking out Denethor and Aragorn beheading the Mouth of Sauron. Probably also the arrival of Elves at Helm's Deep, which I've come (after a while) to accept within the film, but it still considerably weakens the idea of the Elves' detachment from Middle-earth politics.

I do wonder how he would have felt about the changes to some characters, or how some characters' inner conflicts are externalised or shifted in time in the movies. For example, I consider the movie version of Faramir (in the EE) to be very faithful to what the character is about in the book. He seems weaker because he doesn't outright refuse to take the Ring as he does in the book, but it's more due to lack of knowledge rather than lack of will power. Yet it helps make the Ring stronger, because making a character so utterly unaffected by it is probably much harder to pull off in a film than it was in the book. Also, as the EE shows, his actions are motivated by his relationship with his father and brother, which is extremely faithful to the book and thus very cleverly translated to film.

Denethor, on the other hand, even though he does show an inner struggle at some points, is still much too one dimensional for me in the film.

But I consider the film version as abrupt as it comes at the beginning fo the third movie, a nice homage to the original end of the character, done in the same spirit as it is Grima who stabs him to death in a fit of desperate and bitter self loathing and rage.

Agreed. It still shows that Saruman is too far gone to be redeemed by Gandalf's compassion, it still shows Gandalf & Co staying true to their character (see Gandalf's Moria speech (in the film)), and Saruman is still ultimately undone by his own actions.

The spiky wheel drop is an unnecessarily excessive PJism at that point, but it doesn't neutralise the points I just mentioned.

[Brónach 1,302]

You seem very interested in making significant changes to lots of films.

Not to those I love.

You see, I tend to think if I don't consider something to be as good as it could be, I should be able to find a better way myself, or shut up. That I like writing and inventing and telling stories doesn't help stopping me of wondering all the time "Would it be better or worse if they'd done this or that instead?", I'm afraid. I can get quite insane about that.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Brónach 1,302]

Look who's talking.

[BloodBoal 7,538]