The Most Grievous Tragedy

[Lord of Angmar]

I have touched upon this subject in previous threads, but would like to take this time to expound upon it further. <P>The ending of <I>The Return of the King</I> was for me perfect in every way when I first read the book. The maturity that the hobbits have gained through their Quest is evident in Frodo's conversation with Saruman on the way home and again in "The Scouring of the Shire," wherein it is revealed that they no longer need the guidance of Gandalf in keeping and restoring the tranquility of the Shire. The sadness of "Grey Havens" moved me deeply, as I realized that, though in true fairy tale fashion the King was crowned and got his Queen, and a peace was brought to all the land, ultimately the story was a tragedy, as the Elves faded from mortal lands never to return, and the Frodo too grew weary of the land which he had loved so much before the Ring came into play.<P>Of course, I knew from the day I heard they were making a movie trilogy of <I>The Lord of the Rings</I> that the "Scouring of the Shire" would be either impossible to include in a theatrical release, or else it would fail miserably to please mass audiences. But I still held out hope that the "Grey Havens" would have the same effect on me in the <I>Return of the King</I> movie as they did on the book.<P>Unfortunately, that hope proved unfounded.<P>What I saw instead was a Disney-esque wrap-up to a <I>Return of the King</I> movie which had otherwise pleased me as a Tolkien fan and moviegoer beyond the realm of my expectations. It started with Arwen and Elrond. The wedding scene, to be sure, was very touching, but the tale of Arwen Undomiel and her father is extremely tragic in its ultimate fulfillment, and the movie did not adequately express the pain of Elrond at having to leave his daughter forever (in the word's most literal sense), nor did I see any sign of the bitterness that Tolkien ascribed to the final parting of Arwen and Elrond beyond the confines of the world. Elrond just seemed to be a proud father who had come to grips with his wife choosing a husband, and nothing more.<P>Skip ahead to the Grey Havens, since in between was pretty nicely done (particularly the scene with the four hobbits and the <A HREF="http://forum.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=002617" TARGET=_blank>pumpkin</A> in the Green Dragon). The Grey Havens, for me, had the wrong feel. There was just too much light and too much smiling, in my own humble opinion. Galadriel did mention that the Elves were leaving Middle-earth and the dominion of Men was now begun, but she said it without even the slightest tinge of sadness in her voice. The Elves leaving is supposed to represent the steady decline of all things good in the world, losing the Long Defeat despite winning the War. I did not get a sense of that at all from the movie. A friend of mine asked me (almost verbatim) "So, where were they headed on that ship at the end? And why were they leaving, just because Frodo's shoulder hurt? And why did the Elves leave?" Frodo said, "We set out to save the Shire, Sam - and we did. But not for me," and that was the end of it. We never really learned of Frodo's immense depression at not being honored or even fully respected (there were always rumors going around about him being strange and anchorite-like), nor did we learn the profound effect of the Ring, the injury at Weathertop, and the Quest on his psyche.<P>It all seemed too packaged - Aragorn's Kingship (and the cliched speech he gave upon accepting it), Sam's wedding, Bilbo's and Frodo's last journey. It felt as if the ending was being fed to us, that Peter Jackson was trying to break down Professor Tolkien's ending into easily digestible soundbytes that forced us to believe that everything had been wrapped up ship-shape. For me, at least, it did not convey the sad, operatic aura that clung like a dreary fog to the end of <I>The Lord of the Rings</I> books, and this for me was a tragedy because Peter Jackson brought across the feeling of Tolkien's novel so well in most other places, and this was the one place I had hoped he would succeed the most.<p>[ 7:35 PM January 04, 2004: Message edited by: Lord of Angmar ]

[Silmiel of Imladris]

I agree with the Elrond and Arwen bit. It was sad but I think more could have been added. I know it really wasn't in the book for no one was with them so no one knew but I think the last time Arwen and Elrond were together should have been included even if PJ had to make the whole thing up. All that is disscussed about this in the book is that Arwen said good bye to her brothers but she and her father went into the hills for their last moments together. So sad.

[Essex]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> It all seemed too packaged - Aragorn's Kingship (and the cliched speech he gave upon accepting it), Sam's wedding, Bilbo's and Frodo's last journey. It felt as if the ending was being fed to us, that Peter Jackson was trying to break down Professor Tolkien's ending into easily digestible soundbytes that forced us to believe that everything had been wrapped up ship-shape. For me, at least, it did not convey the sad, operatic aura that clung like a dreary fog to the end of The Lord of the Rings books, and this for me was a tragedy because Peter Jackson brought across the feeling of Tolkien's novel so well in most other places, and this was the one place I had hoped he would succeed the most.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Not that I agree with the above, but the EE will surely fix some or all of this for you. It was a just a matter of what he could fit in. As much as Jackson says he would make the cinematice versions of the films as long as he wanted, I'm sure he realised that to do anything over 3 1/2 hours at the cinema would be madness. This is the ONLY problem I have with the film i.e. the ending was too rushed. That is why the EE versions are the definitive versions of the movies, and I bet Jackson will admit to this once he's got the Best Film/Director Oscars in his hands.

[Gil-Galad]

when i saw the movie for the first time, i thought i was gonna see Cirdan! or an old man greet the hobbits at least<P>and "scourging of the shire" was tooken out becasue the major climax was during the ring getting melted and the battles etc. andafter that happened, it went down, and PJ didn't want to go up to another climax then back down again

[Finwe]

I definitely agree. The Arwen-Elrond closure definitely could have been improved. From the Books, I received the impression that Elrond's grief transcended mere tears. He had lost his twin brother, his wife, and now his only daughter. His grief was something deep-seated, that he desperately tried to cover up for the sake of all Middle-earth. There was a deep bitterness in his eyes, that showed laid his grief bare, for those who knew to look into them. I did NOT get that from the movie. In the movie, they had Elrond sniffling, with rather ordinary tears. Hugo Weaving, with his enormous potential (no sarcasm there!), could have done SO much better, if he had been given the opportunity.

[The Only Real Estel]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>It all seemed too packaged - Aragorn's Kingship (and the cliched speech he gave upon accepting it), Sam's wedding, Bilbo's and Frodo's last journey. It felt as if the ending was being fed to us, that Peter Jackson was trying to break down Professor Tolkien's ending into easily digestible soundbytes that forced us to believe that everything had been wrapped up ship-shape. For me, at least, it did not convey the sad, operatic aura that clung like a dreary fog to the end of The Lord of the Rings books, and this for me was a tragedy because Peter Jackson brought across the feeling of Tolkien's novel so well in most other places, and this was the one place I had hoped he would succeed the most.<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I'm afraid that's what PJ did because he didn't give it <I>enough</I> time. It's way to difficult to try to get all the feelings, emotions, & reasons in when you barely have time for the actual departures, etc. I hope he does something with it in the EE, but to me, I think PJ using the EE as somewhat of a crutch. He (& most everyone else) is willing to give things small amounts of time & just come back & 'fix' them in the EE. But RotK should be done as the final product, & once you've got that done, then the EE can be sculpted off of that. As everyone's said before, the 'it'll be fixed in the EE' lines make RotK seem like one big huge (& somewhat rushed) 3 & a half hour trailer for the EE.

[The Saucepan Man]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> I'm afraid that's what PJ did because he didn't give it enough time. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>As I have said elsewhere, one of the main criticisms that I have heard made of the film (outside of Tolkienite circles) is that the ending is too long. And I can see what they mean by this - a 20 minute "wrap up" is lengthy by any standards. Both times that I have seen the film, the audience has just about lasted the length, although second time round they were getting fidgety by the final scene of Sam returning home. To my mind, therefore, the one thing this film needed like a hole in the head was a longer ending.<P>Personally, I liked all of the scenes which marked the closing stages of the film, although the "reunion" of the Fellowship in Minas Tirith could perhaps have been shortened. I found the Grey Havens sequence to be exceptionally moving, moreso second time round for some reason. <P>I can understand why others may not have liked some or all of these scenes, but whatever improvements might have been made (for the theatrical release at least), they should certainly not have involved any lengthening of them.

[Luthien_ Tinuviel]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Personally, I liked all of the scenes which marked the closing stages of the film, although the "reunion" of the Fellowship in Minas Tirith could perhaps have been shortened. I found the Grey Havens sequence to be exceptionally moving, moreso second time round for some reason. <BR> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I enjoyed all of the ending bits, too, especially the second time. It's strange how it's almost better the second time than the first. <P>I definately agree with Saucepan Man in saying that the theatrical (or even the EE, for the most part) did not need a longer end, and would have had trouble if it did. I've heard comments on the length, too, even though I loved it. <P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> It all seemed too packaged - Aragorn's Kingship (and the cliched speech he gave upon accepting it), Sam's wedding, Bilbo's and Frodo's last journey. It felt as if the ending was being fed to us, that Peter Jackson was trying to break down Professor Tolkien's ending into easily digestible soundbytes that forced us to believe that everything had been wrapped up ship-shape. For me, at least, it did not convey the sad, operatic aura that clung like a dreary fog to the end of The Lord of the Rings books, and this for me was a tragedy because Peter Jackson brought across the feeling of Tolkien's novel so well in most other places, and this was the one place I had hoped he would succeed the most.<BR> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>It actually worked for me- and well, at that. I can easily say that the twenty minutes at the end are my favorite part. Maybe it's just me, but by the end I was so absorbed into the movie (and enjoying it so much) that I didn't notice any "package-like tendencies". I would say that the one problem for non-book readers is that they didn't really explain Frodo's need to depart. I think that if I had seen that part without reading the book, I would have been more bewildered than grieved, and trying to figure out just why he should go and just where he's going. They did some excellent build-up scenes (the Green Dragon with pumpkin scene, and the one with Frodo alone in Bag End, followed by Sam's entrance and Frodo's comment about Weathertop). But I don't think that they really emphasized Frodo's need to go, which was necessary for the audience to understand. The ending was still effective, but it left a lot of people confused.

[The Only Real Estel]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I found the Grey Havens sequence to be exceptionally moving, moreso second time round for some reason. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>True, I loved that part of the movie, but it would be nice to at least expound a little on why Frodo left (ie: more than just a hurt shoulder). Although I suppose you're right in saying that the ending couldn't be lengthened (much).

[Essex]

The film was too short.<P>If there really was a 6 hour cut of rotk, I would have been happy to have 2 three hour movies and wait until next year for the 'final' installment! But this would not have worked for the normal non-tolkienite movie going public.

[Althern]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>...i thought i was gonna see Cirdan!...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>He was there, standing to the right, behind Elrond, Galadriel and the cardboard cutout. The same beardless old looking elf that was in the prologue accepting one of the Three (so I guess it must be Cirdan).

[zb]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>There was a deep bitterness in his eyes, that showed laid his grief bare, for those who knew to look into them. I did NOT get that from the movie. In the movie, they had Elrond sniffling, with rather ordinary tears.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I dunno. That look of joy and pain was pretty excellent. Still, I know what you mean. But I'm not sure whether there would be a way for PJ to represent that kind of sadness, even if he'd wanted to. <P>I don't mean acting ability so much as making a movie which is comprehensible to Joe Bloggs off the street. As far as most non-Tolkienites* are concerned, it would be weird for someone to be so sad 'just 'cos his daughter's getting married', because how many people really have and understand the idea that 2 people could be separated <I>for ever</I>? I mean, it makes your head hurt amidst the tears just thinking about it...<P>Call it a necessary dumbing down, if you like.<P>*and various others, I guess, like non-students of indo-european epic

[Lush]

When I first read the title of this read, I had the impression that someone just died.<P>Silly me. <P>Seriously, while the movie's ending didn't have the same effect on me as the book did, I quickly realized that this was all because it's a darn <I>movie</I>. Books tease the imagination, flooding our brains with visions of things no filmmaker could put on screen, though some have come close, and I'd argue that Peter Jackson is one of them.<p>[ 9:45 PM January 30, 2004: Message edited by: Lush ]

[Iris Alantiel]

Well said, Lush.<P>I guess PJ and his associates thought the movie had to have as happy an ending as they could get away with without being blatantly non-canonical (i.e. Frodo stays in the Shire and gets married). So they don't demonstrate the pain of Elrond and Arwen's parting, because it would detract from the happiness of her and Aragorn's wedding And they don't really demonstrate the depth of Frodo's pain because we like Frodo, and we don't want him to be in pain. After spending a minimum of nine hours of our lives on these movies, PJ and friends has decided, we won't want to deal with the sadder side of the story; we'll want to be happy.<P>And for a lot of people, he's right. The idea that Arwen and Elrond will never, never, NEVER see each other again, or that Frodo's spirit has been crushed by the quest he has endured - those are depressing thoughts. After spending so much time watching the struggle to save Middle Earth, such a depressing ending would leave the audience with the impression that Sauron might be gone, but life kind of seemed lot more cheerful before.<P>The bottom line is, books can give us a kind of complexity that movies really can't. From the books, we understand all the nuances of life in ME that lead to Arwen's choice and Frodo's departure, and we can see that these events are not representative of Middle Earth. But in a movie, we have to get an overall sense of a happy ending even though Frodo must leave, or else the entire nine-and-some-odd hours of the journey have been for nothing. Furthermore, we have to get this sense in a fairly short amount of time at the movie's end. So I say, yes, PJ and friends did simplify the ending and sanitize it a little bit to make it more viewer-friendly, but that's how movies are. If you want the original, powerful, tragically beautiful ending, read the books. It's still in there.

[Magician of Nathar]

Well, from what I know, many moviegoers who never read the book didn't feel the end was lacking. Most of them thought the ending was drawn out. Many told me that the movie should end at most at the place when people of Minas Tirith bow down to the hobbits, if not earlier still. To most people, the Greay Havens scene is a waste of time. Happy or sad and bitter. <P>I somewhat agree with them. The scouring of Shire and the Grey havens have never been my favourite part in the book. The professor can go on at times. To add the sadness the Tolkien portrayed in the movie would be ruining a perfectly well ending. LOTR is mythical tale of valour and drama, a wholesome, satisfying ending is necessary to make the audience feel good. Or if it has to be a tragedy, it has to be dramatic and climatic at least, with a big pang, like how Gotterumdang ended. To end it in a fading sadness is just going to leave the audience hanging there, feeling the work is unfinished. Tolkien did that, just a bit. I wasn't very satisfied with the ending at least. On screen it would be even worse. <P>One more thing: Nice, happily-ever-after endings are GOOD!

[The Only Real Estel]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Many told me that the movie should end at most at the place when people of Minas Tirith bow down to the hobbits, if not earlier still. To most people, the Greay Havens scene is a waste of time. Happy or sad and bitter.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Most people that I've talked to would at least like to see the Hobbits make it back to the Shire, just so there's some closure to their journeys. Although I wouldn't have it any other way, it really is a shame that it couldn't end with that shot of the Elven ship sailing off into the distance. It's just such a beautiful shot.

[zb]

Here's a vauge thought I had last night:<P>Do the movies give any reason for Frodo, Bilbo, Gandalf, et al, nicking off over the sea? In the books, you get some sense of what going to Valinor means, and you can see that it is necessary for the ringbearers to go. But is any of that in the movies, or is the whole Grey Havens scene only there because that scene's in the book and book-readers would have a fit if it were cut? Does the Grey Havens scene have anything building up to it?<P>To partly answer my last question, the "into the west" theme is in the soundtrack at 2 points other than the GHs: when Gandalf tells Pippin death ain't so bad after all, and when Sam carries Frodo up Mt Doom. I guess in PJ's mind, these 2 scenes are linked to the Grey Havens. But how? Why?

Arwen has been hanging out with Elrond for 1000s of years. How sad can he really be? She should have moved out and gotten a job or married long ago and given him grandchildren. Parents are supposed to be happy when their children get married.

[zb]

caligulathegod, I'll bite:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>How sad can he really be?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Elrond's not losing his daughter except for Christmases and family birthdays and long weekends. He's losing her forever. The second he gets on the boat to Valinor, she may as well be dead as far as he's concerned, because he won't have another chance to see her before she dies, and since she's going to die, their fates are separate.<P>That's how sad he can really be.<P>Of course, since she's happy to be getting married, he's happy for her. Which is why in the movie he's got that half-smile at Aragorn's coronation. But he's also very sad, and I can't say I blame him.

[Lostregiel]

I don´t agree with you, Lord of Angmar, though I know what you mean.
I loved the final scene, it couldn´t have been longer in the cinema version, because not all the people who see the film are as huge LotR fans as we are, though I hope it will be longer in the extended version

The arwen and Elrond part was awesome. Elrond´s sort of happy at the wedding, but just for her, because she´s happy, I think he showed his grief and sadness both in TTT and RotR, though it´s true that he could have been sadder in the havens, after all he´s leaving much behind, not just arwen, but also Elrohir and Elladan ( though they don´t appear in the books ), but I´m sure he can´t help feeling happy: I´m sure he´s been wanting to leave Middle Earth for quite a while, and they had managed to destroy Sauron and the Ring. Besides, what about Celebrian? He´s going to meet her again, after so long.

Now, about Celeborn, I loved him going as well, I think PJ made a great decision there, it´s one of the things I least liked in the books. why did he choose to remain behind and not leave with her? I don´t know, it just makes it less sad.

Gandalf. His part in the story had ended. He went to Middle Earth to help destroy Sauron, and so he had done. What else was there for him in Middle Earth. Of course there were lots of things and people he loved there, but then, he came from Valimar, and it´s not surprising he wants to go back there. I loved when Pippin asked him something about death, that nostalgic look and half-smile! It was awesome. Going to Valimar fits Gandalf´s description of death. I don´t know, but somehow I had always thought of it as death: they go to a perfect land to meet their loved beings, who went before, not to ever come back.

Galadriel: She, like Elrond, was going to see Celebrian again, It´s true that she was happy, but there was some nostalgy in her eyes, too. I don´t know, maybe you didn´t feel it that way, but I noticed some sadness and nostalgy in all of them.

What I didn´t like very much was Bilbo being so old, I know he was, but it makes me really sad seeing him in such a state. And Frodo? You can´t deny he was sad, just look at him while heading to the havens in the cart with Bilbo. And it was very well described why he had to go:

How do you pick up the pieces of an old life? How do you go on? When in your heart you begin to understand, there is no going back. There are some things that time cannot mend. Some hurts go too deep... and they've taken hold.

Isn´t that enough? I personally loved Frodo´s commentaries at the end of the film.

I think the hobbits had the worst part at the end, it was hardest for them to accept Frodo´s departure, as it was to frodo himself. After all it´s something natural for Elves, and for Gandalf, but not for them. It must have been a hard way back home for them, specially for Sam, who, in the end, I think was the closest to Frodo. But Sam had a family, and life carries on.

I also would have liked to see Cirdan.

It know they could have made it sadder, much sadder, but what for? They considered more important the happy part of the story: the downfall of Sauron, Arwen and Aragorn´s love, Eowyn and Faramir´s, Sam and Rosie´s, Gondor having a king again, the Time of Men...

I think it was awesome, PJ made a great job, not only with the end, but with the whole 3 films. I found it perfect, and it made me cry a lot! Besides, the music was fantastic, too, I love the song "into the west".

LOSTREGIEL

[Lyta_Underhill]

The maturity that the hobbits have gained through their Quest is evident in Frodo's conversation with Saruman on the way home and again in "The Scouring of the Shire," wherein it is revealed that they no longer need the guidance of Gandalf in keeping and restoring the tranquility of the Shire.

I, too, missed this aspect, Lord of Angmar. It helped to differentiate Frodo from the other hobbits and from his surroundings as well. If some sort of treatment of this part had been added, I think it would have gone a long way towards making it crystal clear how different Frodo is at the end from the other three hobbits and also how rarefied he has become with respect to the Shire itself. It would have added the necessary dimension to the Grey Havens scene in my opinion. The pumpkin scene in the Green Dragon merely serves to illustrate how different all of the hobbits are upon their return, but does not set up the events of the Grey Havens, really.

the tale of Arwen Undomiel and her father is extremely tragic in its ultimate fulfillment, and the movie did not adequately express the pain of Elrond at having to leave his daughter forever (in the word's most literal sense), nor did I see any sign of the bitterness that Tolkien ascribed to the final parting of Arwen and Elrond beyond the confines of the world.

I don't think PJ allowed enough time to properly support the bitter leavetaking between these two. As I recall, this occurs after Arwen and Aragorn are wed and it occurs when they are alone. I would say Elrond's expression at the 'unveiling' of Arwen to Aragorn in Minas Tirith is appropriate to where he is; bitterness here would not be proper. I did, however, love Hugo's expression, which seemed to me to radiate a long-standing sadness, more a melancholy with a pang to it, which seems fitting for an Elf in his situation, really.

Cheers!
Lyta

[Essex]

Re: Scouring mentioned earlier in this thread:

As much as I bleated on and on this last year about there not being a scouring of the shire, I now know why it was not included. In a cinematic sense we have already had the Climax to the film in action terms.

To have had another battle, (albeit an important one that shows the growth of the hobbits, and more importantly the irony of the War of the Ring finishing up on Frodo's doorstep where it kind of started) would not have worked on film to an 'non - book' movie goer.

Now I don't give a rat's bottom about wether a non-reader of the book enjoyed the film or not, or if they were fidgeting waiting for the end of the film, but Jackson was dealing with a quarter of a million dollars plus of money (that wasn't his own) so his hands were tied into making the ending without the Scouring.

I would have loved to see it, but come on, we're letting our hearts rule our heads on this one.

PS Lostreigel, your point

Now, about Celeborn, I loved him going as well, I think PJ made a great decision there, it´s one of the things I least liked in the books.

I think what Tolkien was showing is that Galadriel (and Elrond) had to make the 'sacrifice' of leaving Middle-earth almost immeadiately after the Ring was destroyed because the Rings they (and Gandalf) had used were tied up with the One Ring, and all was fading on Middle-earth that was built with them. This could also include themselves to some extent?

Celeborn had unfinished business before they were to leave Middle-earth. ie He (and not Galadriel) was the leader of their Company of Elves. How could he up and leave them until all had returned West?

The reason why we have Celeborn leave with Galadriel in the film is becuase it's stated in the film that this was the LAST ship to leave Middle-earth for Valinor. (And in this case, bye bye forever for Frodo and Sam.........) I'm not sure why Jackson did this.

[Gryphon Hall]

I don't remember when I read this, but I got the link to a transcript of a PJ interview here somewhere. In the interview he was asked what should be the definitive versions of his films. He said the cinematic ones. When asked about the EE versions, he said that he only made those for the fans.

I know it is too late, and I know that it is very, very bad form to criticize the work of a director/producer, but he could have done the traditional narrator wrap-up at the end, just like the prologue sequence in FotR. This would not have resulted in a "second climax" and it would have taken less time to show more, even the Scouring. The credits could have been shown during this wrap up, with scene after scene fading in and out, giving a feel of the actual length of time that has passed between the Battle of Bywater to the Last Riding. The last scene as it is could then make more sense (I am really sorry, but I really found it an unforgiveable Disneyfication the way it "just happened").

Because, it is true that a second climax is no good. When I first read the book, I was disoriented with the Battle of Bywater and Sharkey's End, only understanding its importance at the last exchange of words between Saruman and Frodo. To put a second climax into the movie, even if it is the Extended Edition DVD, would have been very bad form. Yet the wrap-up should have done more to instill catharsis.

Call it a necessary dumbing down, if you like.

That is so tragically true. I also understand that PJ had to make the movie for the masses who won't understand. On a public transport some time after the release of RotK, I overheard people talking about "The Last Samurai" and RotK; they hated the essentially plot-driven and dialogue-rich Last Samurai, but loved RotK, not because it was a richer movie (which I think it is), but because they loved the "action". These are the people that PJ has to please, tragically. It is beyond his powers to wise the people up with the movie (Tolkien couldn't do that with his books), but at least he has created a tantalizing glimpse of what's in store for them if they do.

Pax.

[Essex]

once the oscars have been given, you will see (maybe a few months, definately just before ee rotk comes out) that Jackson will 'change his mind' and state that the EE are the definitive versions.

at the moment, if jackson was to say, well the cinematic version isn't really the complete version, then I would hazard to guess a lot of oscar voters would deem the film they are voting for (ie the cinematic one) as not worthy of a best picture award as it is not even the complete version.

jackson, no matter what he might say, had to cut the films down to a viewable size for the cinema. thus he had to cut out things that he did not want to. (maybe gandalf v witchking and mouth of sauron for example)

ps re the epilouge mentioned above. I believe one was done, or at least planned. have a listen to the directors' commentary on the ee fotr dvd. where we see the fellowship of the ring title jackson/boyens/walsh mention that the films will be 'bookended' by Galadriel. I take this to mean they at least planned an epilouge. Indeed in an interview (somewhere on aint it cool news) boyens and walsh were interviewed and stated that there could well be an epilouge at the end of the rotk ee (including what happened afterwards - ie the appendix)

[The Only Real Estel]

An epilouge by Galadriel on top of the ending they already have? Or smashed in between it? Either way, I think Jackson would be lengthening it more than he can afford to...

[QuickSlash]

Real Estel, I believe they meant instead of the ending given. If so, I agree. I'd never thought of it myself (I've never though much of how I'd change the movie, just what I liked and disliked), but at this point, it sounds nice. Would've given even more closure by having Galadriel 'bookend' it, as someone else'd said.

I would not have lengthened it at all. I was one of those people getting fidgety at the end, and I loved the books. I just don't have a three and a half hour long attention span.

But, concerning the depth of relationships and characters, I believe all three movies lacked such. The hobbits didn't really mature, Eowyn was far too common, Elrond and Arwen, etc. There just wasn't time to develop everyone and everything as fully as the books did and still keep people interested.

[Groin Redbeard]

Originally Posted by Lord of Angmar

The Grey Havens, for me, had the wrong feel. Galadriel did mention that the Elves were leaving Middle-earth and the dominion of Men was now begun, but she said it without even the slightest tinge of sadness in her voice. The Elves leaving is supposed to represent the steady decline of all things good in the world, losing the Long Defeat despite winning the War.

I'd have to disagree with you on that. I'm not sure if Galadriel was happy or sad that the elves were leaving, but why should she be sad for them when they are heading to a better place?

The Grey Havens was the most touching moment for me of the movie. I think Peter Jackson did a wonderful job with it, but that's my opinion.