Dumbing it down

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Neithan

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.

Not sure if he or the other commentators knew the stories well or not; irregardless, what they ended up writing/filming was not the books. However, what makes me suspicious is that the first film was close with some parts of the story missing, the second added scenes not found in the books, and the third continued this divergence with more input from the writers than from JRRT.

I understand (somewhat) adaptation, but adding to the story was just wrong.

[lord of dor-lomin]

totally agree, but to me Im able to pretend in most cases that what doesn't happen in the film that SHOULD do, does happen. i.e. I can marry both film and book together whilst watching the film, so when I watch the WK scene, Merry gets the Witch King with the sword that Tom gave him.

Well, that's all fine and dandy for you, but non-readers certainly can't do this. There is no way for non-readers to reconcile the silliness of the WK's death.

First of all I think that the problem with the swords could have been cleared up by Aragorn saying that they were heirlooms of his people and were magic.

Yes! Thank you! It was a problem that could've been fixed. Someone could've said (Elrond, Gandalf, Galadriel, or Aragorn) when looking at the blade, "Hey, this blade was forged specifically to kill the WK". I know that seems like dumbing it down, but Tolkien was very clear on this point. When Merry stabbed TWK Tolkien specifically said that no other blade in the world, though wielded by a mighty warrior, could have hurt TWK so bad- so making it obvious would not have dumbed the movie down.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by lord of dor-lomin

Yes! Thank you! It was a problem that could've been fixed. Someone could've said (Elrond, Gandalf, Galadriel, or Aragorn) when looking at the blade, "Hey, this blade was forged specifically to kill the WK". I know that seems like dumbing it down, but Tolkien was very clear on this point. When Merry stabbed TWK Tolkien specifically said that no other blade in the world, though wielded by a mighty warrior, could have hurt TWK so bad- so making it obvious would not have dumbed the movie down.

When Aragorn gives the hobbits their swords, it looks like he found them somewhere (in a junk pile) and hands them over, like, "here, these are better than sticks."

The boy's (Haleth?) sword at Helm's Deep gets more attention and scrutiny.

And why did PJ have Merry's blade wither? Was this to show that something important happened? I don't think that Eowyn's blade suffered so.

[lord of dor-lomin]

And why did PJ have Merry's blade wither?

I thought that every blade that touched TWK was supposed to do that. Did Eowyn's not bust? Or did she drop it too quick to tell?

The boy's (Haleth?) sword at Helm's Deep gets more attention and scrutiny.

Yeah. Can you get any more addle-brained, PJ? Bring in some little kid and have Aragorn swing his sword around (something that was pointless and made up) and don't explain Merry's sword (something that was important and in the book).

Makes sense to me.

When Aragorn gives the hobbits their swords, it looks like he found them somewhere (in a junk pile) and hands them over, like, "here, these are better than sticks."

Ha ha ha!!

You're right on! That's exactly what it was like!

[Fordim Hedgethistle]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the film, doesn't Merry stab the WK with the dagger he was given by Galadriel in Lorien?? There's not much of a big deal made of that blade, but it was from the White Lady. . .

Or did he use the sword of the Rohirrim given him by Eowyn. . .?

Either way, I too would have liked a bit of an explanation as to the magical provenance of Merry's blade, but I don't think it's necessary. The WK is not diminished by the lack of magic-blade in anyway -- just look at the size of his mace!!!

WHAZZOK!

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Fordim Hedgethistle

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the film, doesn't Merry stab the WK with the dagger he was given by Galadriel in Lorien?? There's not much of a big deal made of that blade, but it was from the White Lady. . .

Or did he use the sword of the Rohirrim given him by Eowyn. . .?

Not sure with what sword he is armed. Assume that it was either the one given to him by Aragorn or the one gifted by Galadriel. Most likely the one he received at Weathertop (just thinking about what it looked like when he uses it on the Pelennor fields). How does he get either back after his Uruk Hai riding experience? I can't remember seeing his sword being returned to him when he meets the three hunters at Orthanc.

We readers all know how he gets his sword back, but what assumption did the average movie-goer make, or wasn't it that important as seemingly any sharp object wielded by a Hobbit will do?

[lord of dor-lomin]

The WK is not diminished by the lack of magic-blade in anyway

I wouldn't say that. He kills Theoden, defeats Gandalf, and has the whole "no man can kill" line stuck on him, and as you said, with his mace and all he looks like an absolute beast...

...but then he gets killed in a weak, dumb way. That is definitely getting "diminished".

No doubt about that. You can't argue it. As someone said a few pages ago, he gets poked by a knife and proceeds to kneel down in front of Eowyn for ten minutes and allows her to take off her helmet, say her line, and stab him in the face. How stupid is that?

That's the same way you'd kill some little orc that got on your nerves. The only difference was that TWK's face crumpled up before he died. Ooh, aah, nice visual effect... that cool face crumple action sure makes up for his weak death now, doesn't it? Almost makes me forget he went out like a punk.