Movie improvements on the book?!

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Before anyone stones me for even thinking the words of the title, let me say that I’ve complained about the changes as much as many others have. However, there is at least one scene that I liked better in the movie. When reading TTT, it always puzzled me that the death of Théodred, Théoden’s son, was spoken of so casually. After all, an important person, the heir to the throne of Rohan, dies within the timeframe of the events of which the book tells – and it is only mentioned in passing! <P>That’s why I really liked seeing him, if only in dying, in the movie. Besides giving Miranda Otto some wonderful acting opportunities as Éowyn, I felt that his loss was explained much more strongly by having his death shown onscreen.<P>How do you feel about this scene? Did you think there were other scenes that improved on the book?

[Garen LiLorian]

I'd agree with you on that one. <P>Wormtongue's attraction to Eowyn is another thing that is mentioned only in passing in the books, and I was glad to see it. After all, it is, if not his entire at least his major motivation for selling out Rohan and his King. Plus, it allowed some of Tolkien's "narrator prose" to come out as dialogue. Even if it was a bit mangled.

[Laialthriel]

Estelyn, thank you so much for starting this post! Since there has been some (okay a <I>lot</I> of) negative feed-back from the movie (which is understandable) this is a wonderful breath of fresh air.<BR> I wholeheartedly agree about Theodred's death scene. I barely even caught the happenings of that in the book, as well as Wormtongue's attraction to Eowyn. <BR> Another scene I was grateful for was when Frodo stuck up for Smeagol and asked Sam why he kept calling him names and all. Now maybe I've just missed that in the book, but I have always been wondering why Frodo did not do that (or enough of it) in the book. I just think the way(s) they portrayed those three character's and their relationships to one another was wonderful. <P>~*Laialthriel*~

[Nenya]

Exactly, thanks Esty!<P>This can't really be called an improvement, but I think that Eowyn on the whole was really well transformed into a movie chracter. The thing is, I didn't really appreciate her that much in the books, couldn't quite identifie with her situation. In the movie I had no problem with that, even though she was allmost exactly the same person. I know, this has a bit to do with the fact, that it usually is easier to identifie with a chracter that you can actually see and hear. But still, good work writers& Miranda Otto!

[Sapphire_Flame]

Laialthriel, you said it perfectly!!!!

[Gorwingel]

Yes, I agree with all those scenes, I thought the scene of Theoden mourning his sons death was very beautiful. If the film improved on anything it was the scenes in Rohan (except for the part with Gandalf releasing Theoden, that was crazy!)

[Laialthriel]

Nenya ~ <BR>I wholeheartedly agree about Eowyn. I didn't give her a whole lot of thought and attention in the books for some reason. But I don't think they could have chosen a better actress for her...Miranda was superb. She brought the character to life for me and made her more much more enjoyable.<P>I'm curious to know what other BDs thought about the scene is Osigiliath where Frodo almost hands the Ring over to the Nazgul. It kind of bothered me because I really don't think that is the way Frodo would have acted. Don't you think he would have run away from it screaming something like "It's mine! My own!" instead? It is one of the 'new' scenes in the movie I haven't heard anyone talk about much. Any thoughts? <P>~*laialthriel*~<p>[ January 08, 2003: Message edited by: Laialthriel ]

[Nieninque]

Eowyn came out in the movie as much less 'cold' than she is in the books. I can really identify with her regarding Aragorn and how she's always put to the side because she's a woman (can't wait for the Nazgul scene in RotK!)<P>I especially liked the scene at Osgiliath when Frodo almost kills Sam... it illustrates perfectly what the Ring is doing to Frodo, and plus it made me cry

[mollecon]

Speaking in more general terms & including both movies, I think some of the movie characters are defenitely more interesting than their book counterparts - certainly Aragorn, but others as well.

[Nenya]

Phew, someone else brought this up! I was sure everyone would hate me if I said Aragorn was a lot more interesting in the movies than he was in the books. Now, I understand why some people aren't too happy about the changes in his chracter. The biggest problem seems to be the fact that he is almost afraid of his inheritance. But come on, book-Aragorn isn't really a person at all, just an archtype of a good king. They just <I>had</I> to make him more human. And succeeded in that, in my opinion. (Now you can all shoot me. )

[Nostie]

One scene i liked in the movie was when smeagol tells gollum to leave and never come back...in the book (or did i miss it?) i didn't really see the change in gollum/smeagol. It only said he didnt talk as much to himself. but in the movie it actually shows smeagol taking over

[doug*platypus]

... yeah, the Gollum/Sméagol debate is a masterpiece of filmmaking, all the more remarkable for his being a digital character. That's one of the most memorable scenes in any movie that I've ever seen, and adds a lot to the fairly sketchy description in the book (although to even construct that scene was a work of genius Shakespeare would have either been proud of or stolen for himself!).<P>I agree that using the emotion surrounding Théodred's death was very good for the film, and for the character of Théoden (who I thought in general was adapted unfavourably). The bond of love between Éowyn and Éomer as siblings is shown very well, and so is the strength of their feelings for their foster brother Théodred. But for me it was hard to get over the dismissal of the Battles of the Fords of Isen. Théodred's death was sad, but fairly random, and not direcly ordered by Saruman as it is in Unfinished Tales.<P>I assume we're just talking about improvements to TTT, here (Estelyn, maybe you could clarify?). One of my favourites was the shot of Gollum in the Dead Marshes. Frodo looks up and sees him imaging his precious is in his hand, showing a shocking vision of what Frodo may become. I think that a lot of the improvements come from the fact that it is a visual medium. The many fine illustrations I've seen have made improvements to the books as well - a picture paints a thousand words (although the movies seem to paint much less than a thousand pages).

[Magician of Nathar]

What a reliefe someone finally brought this up. I do think there are quite a few things that are done better in the movie than in the book(Please don't kill me). I think if PJ followed the exact book version, it wouldn't be that interesting. I mean movie and books are distinctly diffrent art forms. I liked the gollum thing alot, and theodon's mourning for his son is good too. (Though those flowers on the mound are scary....they are so big, and not a bit grieved looking) I especially liked the way they portrayed Aragorn, it feels more realistic. The book Aragorn wouldn't come off well in the movie. People would find him too medieval and King Arthur like, and also a little annoyingly perfect.

[Lily Bracegirdle]

I agree, Gollum is great!<P>Actually, I like Legolas more in the movie than in the book (ducks stones). In the book he was just a generic elf (Prince or not) -- and we didn't even know his hair color, so it was kinda hard to picture him. Now he plays a bigger part and he has some really good interactions with Aragorn (the Gimli ones were already done well in the book so no improvement there). I could have done without the shield surfing, though.<P>-Lily

[The Saucepan Man]

I don't think that the film improves on the book. But, being a visual medium, it is able to develop on some of the events and themes that are there in the text. The portrayal of Gollum and, in particular, the argument between Smeagol and Gollum is an excellent example.<P>Another theme that the film brings out well is the pure horror and brutality of war. The battle scenes at Helms Deep portray this weel, but even more so the lead up to the battle. The scenes where the youngsters and old men are being given armour, weapons and basic training are excellent. They convey such a moving sense of foreboding and dread. To think that these poor people are just about to be pitched into such an utterly horrific situation. The looks of fear on their faces just say it all.

[maikafanawen]

Grr ... how dare you bring this up! The movie was insulting ... haha, just kidding!<P>I thought the movie improved <I>everything</I> in the book. Every scene from the book was taken and advanced to a level where the viewer could not help but get lost in the moment! It was only the things the movie didn't cover that were in the books that we were disappointed in (that's excluding Faramir however). I also am glad someone brought this up. It is a nice breather from dissing the not so great scenes. Lord of the Rings the Movie is the best thing that's ever happened to most us Tolkien fans. I am *almost* centering my life around LOTR

[HCIsland]

I love the visuals of Isengard. I remember seeing an advanced trailer quite a while before the Fellowship was released and there was that shot of Gandalf riding towards Isengard and there was Orthanc against the backdrop of mountains. It froze me in my seat and I still have it as the desktop of my computer.<P>The book is almost entirely written from the view point of the hobbits, except for some requisite chapters that are from Aragorn's view point, but that amounted to no more then five or six chapters of the whole book. This made sense as the idea was that it is a translation of the Red Book, written by Bilbo, Frodo and Sam. As a result we didn't learn about what was going on in other places until characters showed up from those places and told us what was up.<P>I liked seeing all the scenes from Isengard. The work in the pits. Saruman addressing his armies. That was all great stuff. I think the theme of industrialization, machine over nature, came across very well.<P>I think I have Orthanc envy. <P>Man, what would Freud say? <P>H.C.<p>[ January 14, 2003: Message edited by: HCIsland ]

[Lalaith]

I agree with Lily Bracegirdle on the Legolas question. He is a little elusive as a character in the books, so turning him into a dude in the film worked very well. As a purist, I have to confess, I loved the shield surf! (Ducks HAIL of stones)<BR>Helms Deep, which was just a chapter/skirmish in the book TT, was made hugely more significant in the film, but it was really well done, the best battlescene I've ever seen - so that would count as an improvement. <BR>I disagree about Aragorn and Eowyn though. I loved Icemaiden Eowyn of the book. Miranda Otto was lovely, yes, but too Meg Ryanish for my liking.<p>[ January 15, 2003: Message edited by: Lalaith ]

[the real findorfin]

Even though the elves were not supposed to turn up at Helm's Deep (and I understand all the sundering between Elves and Men, ie. LAST Alliance) but it was just so cool. I was really emotional how they turned up and helped even though they didn't have to. I got that tingly feeling, great!