Dumbing it down

[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.

[Lathriel]

After reading this thread I began to understand something about why I like the movies so much.

Although I compare the books to the movies like anybody else, I enjoy them appart. (As has been said already) However, I also look at the movies like a piece of art. It is very difficult not to. I think you guys are forgetting that this movie does represent the view of the people who worked on it, which happens with any play/movie that you see, You can't expect the movie to be exactly as you imagined it because the people who made it are different from you. They live differently and have different point of views so they will see the book differently as well.

In this thread it seems that you guys believe it isn't allowed to look at things i from another point of view.So if you want the movie the way you imagined it, go ahead, make it.

Of course I also see there are faults but I just let it lie and accept that everyone sees things from another perspective.

P.S. You also have to remeber that PJ couldn't just focus on the script alone. he had other things to do like directing a movie! Which means overseeing the art department, WETA, the costumes, the sets etc.

[the phantom]

Oh, don't give me all that "different point of view/perspective" stuff. I already addressed that a few pages back when I said this-

Most of the complaints have nothing to do with PJ's "vision" (or personal interpretation) of the story.

If PJ thinks that elves have pointy ears and you don't agree, or if he thinks that Faramir is 6'4" but you think he's 6'6"- that would be where his "vision of the story" would come into play.

But what about having Faramir taking Frodo to Osgiliath? You could read the entire book upside down and backwards and there's still no possible way you could view or interpret the story like that.

Most all of our complaints are about things that were added (to the detriment of the story) or about things that were taken out where the resulting loose ends were left dangling.

Such things have no relation whatsoever to PJ's different "point of view".

You can't expect the movie to be exactly as you imagined it

I seriously doubt that any of us ever harbored such utopian hopes, but we did, perhaps, expect there to be no glaring errors or inconsistencies introduced by complete departures from the text. Was such an expectation unreasonable?

[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...