Saruman's ending (PJ's way) P.S. Spoilers! - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Boromir88 · 10-25-2004, 07:40 PM

I can't find a way to describe this SpM, besides that I partially agree, and I partially don't. I agree to the extent that these are adaptations, and it's only one (or a small group of people's views), not everyone's. So of course I anticipated changes, for good or for bad. And most of the changes are understandable to me, there's just a few where I don't see how PJ rationalized to pull that off, or it was "overboard." Anyway, the part where my view breaks off is, eventhough it is an adaptation, we still have the right to complain. If someone wants to be a purist, and slam PJ on every little subject, that's his own view. (I'm not saying you mean that, just getting out my thoughts, but I think by now everyone can understand them fairly well

).

Encaitare · 10-25-2004, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted By SpM

I must say that I find this to be a very strange statement. Whatever misgivings I may have about particular aspects of the films (and they are few), I enjoy the films wholly when I watch them. I find it difficult to see how anyone can enjoy a film if they are merely "tolerating" aspects of it.

If, in Jackson's adaptation of LotR, Wormtongue is killed by an arrow from Legolas' bow, then so be it. I can accept that. It will not detract from the film for me. Perhaps I am oddity amongst LotR fans, but I do not find myself constantly thinking how they could or should have been done when I am watching the films. I simply suspend my book-based sensibilities and enjoy ...

Well, there are some things in the movies which I have come to accept as just a different version of canon; for example, the Elves at Helm's Deep/Haldir's death or Frodo hanging off the cliff in Mount Doom or the apathy of the Ents or Aragorn's unwillingness to be king, etc. Most changes don't bother me. There are a few things I find a bit cringe-worthy, but it doesn't spoil the overall movie experience. The movies are brilliant, and I'm sure I will love the RotK EE ... I just don't want PJ to mess with my favorite character too much.

Did that make any sense?

radagastly · 10-25-2004, 09:22 PM

Boromir88:

Quote:

But then I look at PJ, and realize oh he just did it for the blood and gore, there's no symbolism in it (but I still like to think he intended it for symbolic purposes lol).

This is actually a difference that makes no difference. Consider the sculptures that line the Acropolis or Notre Dame. The artist is unknown, so no one can know their intentions. That doesn't take anything away from what they make you feel or think when you see them.

Or for that matter, consider a major influence on Tolkien, Beowulf. Who wrote it? By all accounts, it was composed by committee, of sorts. Everyone who sang it added their own two cents to the mix. It wasn't "fixed" in text until it was written down. The same for the "Ilyad" and the "Oddysey." In that case, there was no one "intent" because there was no one artist.

For what it's worth, I think Tolkien made better artistic decisions than Peter Jackson when telling this story for the most part. His characters are better developed (mostly) than Jackson's, and the magic of Middle Earth is more mysterious and subtle (certainly) than Jackson's. But differences are bound to appear when speaking in different mediums. Literature isn't movies (and vice-versa).

P.S. I made a similar comment on this thread--Popularist or Literati Check it out. It's worth a read, and says some very applicable things about the book/movie argument.

Eomer of the Rohirrim · 10-26-2004, 07:36 AM

Imladris, it does appear that you are being bullied on this thread, but such is the price you pay for daring to take a more radical line.

I suppose in the grand scheme of things, it matters not to Saruman who kills him (ignoring all wild theories about the afterlife and Ainur and the like). However, the relationship between Saruman and Grima surely demanded that, for the purposes of a great story, it was Grima who delivered the death blow, as opposed to an indistinct member of the general plot.

Surely the only reason Legolas has been inducted into this killing lark is because he happens to be played by a beautiful and highly popular actor and is no more than a fine action hero who the fans will cheer.

Imladris · 10-26-2004, 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

Imladris, it does appear that you are being bullied on this thread, but such is the price you pay for daring to take a more radical line.

Awww, at least someone noticed...

No...really...I just love to argue. And I bit...hehehe.

To be somewhat on topic...I take the stance of SpM.

gorthaur_cruel · 10-26-2004, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Does throwing a ball over the roof of a house go against gravity?

It only breaks the law when it doesn't come down again.

You misunderstood me.

I merely meant that even if a bow would usually go 400 yards, it doesn't mean it would fly 400 yards directly upwards, as it moves against gravity. The arrow would eventually slow to a crawl, stop, then come back down before reaching Orthanc.

The Only Real Estel · 10-28-2004, 09:05 PM

Quote:

I merely meant that even if a bow would usually go 400 yards, it doesn't mean it would fly 400 yards directly upwards, as it moves against gravity. The arrow would eventually slow to a crawl, stop, then come back down before reaching Orthanc

Given that it's all just good fantasy fun n' games I'm sure the bow would have no problem.
On a more Tolkienish note, I'm sure that a bow given to Legolas by Galadriel herself would be somewhat magical & would probably have very few limitations (realisticly).

Boromir88 · 10-29-2004, 04:28 AM

Estel, not JUST the bow, we also know Legolas has an ability to just replenish arrows in his quiver, so they too are magical. I wonder if they also defy the law of gravity, lol.

jezebelus · 04-04-2007, 04:55 AM

They should show that scene in the movie. I mean Saruman't death. The last scene I remember was on his tower while tree-man were destroying his empire.

TheGreatElvenWarrior · 08-05-2007, 04:33 PM

I have the EE RotK and heres how it goes...

Gandalf comes to Isengaurd for info and Saurman pulls out the Palantir and Wormtounge comes up and Theoden convinces him to come down and so Grima starts to, then Saurman smacks him, Grima falls pulls his dagger from the sheath stabs Saurman in the back 3 times Legolas shoots him with his bow and arrow, in the heart, Saurman falls onto his machinery, and so ends Saurman.

Hope this helps.

10-26-2004, 07:36 AM	#4
Eomer of the Rohirrim Auspicious Wraith Join Date: May 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 4,859	Imladris, it does appear that you are being bullied on this thread, but such is the price you pay for daring to take a more radical line. I suppose in the grand scheme of things, it matters not to Saruman who kills him (ignoring all wild theories about the afterlife and Ainur and the like). However, the relationship between Saruman and Grima surely demanded that, for the purposes of a great story, it was Grima who delivered the death blow, as opposed to an indistinct member of the general plot. Surely the only reason Legolas has been inducted into this killing lark is because he happens to be played by a beautiful and highly popular actor and is no more than a fine action hero who the fans will cheer. __________________ Los Ingobernables de Harlond

04-04-2007, 04:55 AM	#9
jezebelus Newly Deceased Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 4	They should show that scene in the movie. I mean Saruman't death. The last scene I remember was on his tower while tree-man were destroying his empire. __________________ diseasesarchive.com

08-05-2007, 04:33 PM	#10
TheGreatElvenWarrior Mighty Quill Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Walking off to look for America Posts: 2,230	Ee I have the EE RotK and heres how it goes... Gandalf comes to Isengaurd for info and Saurman pulls out the Palantir and Wormtounge comes up and Theoden convinces him to come down and so Grima starts to, then Saurman smacks him, Grima falls pulls his dagger from the sheath stabs Saurman in the back 3 times Legolas shoots him with his bow and arrow, in the heart, Saurman falls onto his machinery, and so ends Saurman. Hope this helps. __________________ The Party Doesn't Start Until You're Dead.

10-25-2004, 07:40 PM	#1
Boromir88 Laconic Loreman Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: USA Posts: 7,521	I can't find a way to describe this SpM, besides that I partially agree, and I partially don't. I agree to the extent that these are adaptations, and it's only one (or a small group of people's views), not everyone's. So of course I anticipated changes, for good or for bad. And most of the changes are understandable to me, there's just a few where I don't see how PJ rationalized to pull that off, or it was "overboard." Anyway, the part where my view breaks off is, eventhough it is an adaptation, we still have the right to complain. If someone wants to be a purist, and slam PJ on every little subject, that's his own view. (I'm not saying you mean that, just getting out my thoughts, but I think by now everyone can understand them fairly well ).

10-29-2004, 04:28 AM	#8
Boromir88 Laconic Loreman Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: USA Posts: 7,521	Estel, not JUST the bow, we also know Legolas has an ability to just replenish arrows in his quiver, so they too are magical. I wonder if they also defy the law of gravity, lol.