Dumbing it down

[Essex]

lord dor-lomin,

Take a close look at the text of the WK scene.

as important as merry's blade is (as I've said countless times) it's not just the blade itself that helps defeat the witch king. It's the point that Merry is OVERLOOKED by everyone (except eowyn) which works exactly as it does in the book. Merry was able to sneak up on the witch king and attack him from behind, hitting him just below the knee (perhaps a play on Achilles' heel?) and dealt a BITTER blow. No matter whether he had a great sword or not, if he was a great Warrior etc, he would have NOT GOT NEAR the WK to attack him. It was becuase he was a 'lowly' hobbit, totally disregarded, that he was able to help defeat the WK. This theme is EXACTLY the same in the film as it is in the book, and is highly important. If PJ could have somehow fit in the Barrowdown scenes with the Numenorean sword then this scene would have been perfect.

On top of this, why wouldn't the WK kneel there for a matter of seconds after taking the blow from Merry? Yes, eowyn removes her helmet and says her line at this point in the film, but the WK had been dealt a BITTER blow as Tolkien tells us. Indeed, in the book, Eowyn slowly gets up from her knees, "tottering, struggling up", so this would take longer than removing her helmet and saying her world famous line at this point.

The reason PJ makes his helmet wither like it does, is because HE WAS BEING FAITHFUL TO THE BOOK. Read the scene from the book closely and you will see.


Neithan,

re

Several times Peter Jackson stumbled when trying to remember how things happened in the book as opposed to his changes. It became quite clear after he was corrected several times by the other commentators that he didn't know Tolkien's stories all that well.

We also see this in the EE of FOTR. PJ doesn;t know the book TOO well, but it really wasn't him that wrote (and re-wrote) the script. In my opinion it was Phillipa Boyens and Fran Walsh, looking at the interviews the 3 held in various sections of the EEs.

[lord of dor-lomin]

Yes yes, Essex, Merry was "overlooked" in the movie, just like in the book. I never complained about that.

but the WK had been dealt a BITTER blow as Tolkien tells us

As "Tolkien tells us"??? How in the world does that relate to the movie? You are speaking of the book! Non-readers watching the movie have no clue what you're talking about when you say "bitter blow".

The movie blow wasn't a "bitter blow". It was a hobbit with a very ordinary weapon. Why should TWK fall down because of it? I mean- in The Fellowship, that big orc that Aragorn fought- Aragorn stabbed him in the leg and the orc didn't even come close to falling down. That orc didn't even stop when he got impaled!

So if an orc doesn't fall down after getting stabbed twice by a great warrior, we would expect that the ultimate bad guy would be able to withstand a hobbit induced leg wound just a little bit better than what he did!

Indeed, in the book, Eowyn slowly gets up from her knees, "tottering, struggling up", so this would take longer than removing her helmet and saying her world famous line at this point.

Being faithful to the book in this way is a BAD thing, because PJ had already ruined it by NOT being faithful to the book when it comes to Merry's sword. In other words, he had TWK get damaged just as badly as he was in the book, but he neglected to give a reason as to why he was damaged so much.

There is NO WAY that this scene works for someone who doesn't already know about Merry's sword. PJ's partial adherence to the text only makes the scene worse. He should've just come up with his own thing for TWK's death if he wasn't going to explain Merry's sword.

[davem]

There's some interesting stuff here:http://tolkien.slimy.com/faq/History.html (sections 2-4). The references to lines in the books:

Doubtless the Orcs despoiled them, but feared to keep the knives, knowing them for what they are: work of Westernesse, wound about with spells for the bane of Mordor.(The Departure of Boromir)

&

No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will. (Battle of Pelenor Fields)

Seem most relevant.

This is another example of how you excise parts of Tolkien's text at your peril. At least in the radio series the adaptors take into account their exicision of the Bombadil/Barrow Downs episode by having the WK exclaim, when Merry stabs him 'Halfling, you sting like a gnat' or something. In other words they have him dismiss Merry's strike as meaningless & it serves merely as a distraction for Eowyn to find time to deal the death blow. This also diminishes Merry's part in his death, but it does get round the problem of Merry using a normal weapon. At least they take the story seriously enough to understand that if Merry's blow is to have any serious effect on the WK it would only be if it was struck by the Barrow Blade.

Originally Posted by Essex

The reason PJ makes his helmet wither like it does, is because HE WAS BEING FAITHFUL TO THE BOOK. Read the scene from the book closely and you will see.

Well, in the book he wasn't wearing a helmet at all - if I remember rightly - but a Crown on his (invisible) head.

I think LoDL makes the central point - you can't pick & choose which bits you will faithfully reproduce from the book & which you'll change without a lot more thought for the implications than the movie writers seem to have put in...

[Lathriel]

Although the withking in the movie does seem to have helm it also has a crown. It is a helm and crow combined. Besides if you folowed some of the descriptions of Tolkien precisely as he wrote them they might not have worked on screen. Some of the people from the art department continually complained about the difficulty of the helmets with wings for the Gondorian soldiers. It was very easy to make the gondorian armour look extremely gaudy or just plain ridiculous.

[The Tennis Ball Kid]

I'm pretty sure Merry stabs Wiki with the sword he got at Dunharrow, he had lost the other two by that point.

Originally Posted by Formendacil

Does it feel right that a Ring that lay lost for 3000 years, and then right under Gandalf's nose for 60+ years is discovered by Gandalf to be THE One Ring in the course of, what the movie shows, as about 3 months? It doesn't feel right.

At least six months I'd say, judging by Barliman's line about not seeing him in six months. Felt about right to me (in the context of the film), he gets suspicious about it, rides off to the nearest public library to read up on Rings of Power, rides back, and tells Frodo he's got the Big One.

Then, in the Return of the King, Jackson shoots his own work down, and has Elrond make it to Dunharrow in what appears to be a matter of a couple days, after establishing how long it took Aragorn to get there (if by a slightly longer route) from Rivendell.

It may look like it took him only a couple of days, but he presumably started right after Arwen had him reforge the sword, which was presumably right after she got back from almost sailing across the sea, which actually might be rather close to the time the Fellowship left and she had her little spat with Aragorn. In other words he may hve left Rivendell not long at all after Aragorn did. You're right that the timeline isn't entirely coherent when viewing ROTK, but it might make more sense if you watched the three films in a fairly short period of time.

No doubt the timeline would have made more sense if they had left the scrapped "Arwen at Helm's Deep" storyline in.


ttbk

[Boromir88]

In other words he may hve left Rivendell not long at all after Aragorn did. You're right that the timeline isn't entirely coherent when viewing ROTK

Jackson does this with the Haldir scene, coming in to Helm's Deep...He basically said Elrond and Galadriel telepathically cybered after the Fellowship left Lorien, and Haldir approximately left at the end of FOTR. Sounds sort of like a cover up to me on a time mistake, but oh well.

I love on the FOTR EE when Jackson and crew are asked why didn't you have Glamdring shine when orcs are around like Sting? Jackson sort of squirms in his chair, and I believe it is Boyens who responds "budget restraints," and Jackson quickly agrees. It doesn't make a difference whether Glamdring shines or not, however you get the feeling Jackson wasn't as well learned as some of our very own downers. Of course who got everything the first time they read it...or even repeated readings? There's something new to find out each time you read it. Very fascinating.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I love on the FOTR EE when Jackson and crew are asked why didn't you have Glamdring shine when orcs are around like Sting? Jackson sort of squirms in his chair, and I believe it is Boyens who responds "budget restraints," and Jackson quickly agrees.

At least in this case Jackson is consistent. No one said anything about Glamdring glowing, so why would it glow (assume non-reader)? Sting had to as Bilbo said that it would.

Plus, it wasn't Glamdring...

After flying out of Orthanc, Gandalf either forgot his luggage or it was shipped to a different destination, never catching up with him, and so Saruman got to keep both his staff and Glamdring.

Luckily, on the way to Rivendell, Gandalf stopped at a 'Staff 'R' Us' shop (opening a new location in Gondor soon!) and purchased a 72" brown driftwood model. He 'acquired' a new sword from one of the ones sitting around on display in Rivendell.