What are your most hated parts about the L.O.T.R movies?

I am curious about what parts of the movies you hated the most. Did they leave out too much from the books? You tell me.

[Boromir88]

Leaving out parts of the book isn't a big deal. Tolkien admits in Letter 210 that cuts need to be made in order to translate his books onto the screen.

I think overall Jackson's films were great pieces of literature in themselves, he shows he's got the potential of becoming a good director. There are a few things that get me upset with him about, and it's not diversions from the books because he explains most of them, it's actualy some mistakes as a film director which shows that he has not fully gotten away from his old horror movie days.

The biggest one being the chopping off of the Mouth of Sauron's head. This shows total disrespect for the rules of war, rules in which Tolkien understood, and rules in which other directors who have made war movies (Troy, Braveheart, The Patriot, King Arthur) all show that you can't kill messengers.

The Mouth of Sauron is a messenger, he can not be assailed, this is established, and it's pretty clearly shown in the movies. Despite what the Mouth of Sauron said, he was no threat, and could have been driven off by "words" and sent away fleeing like the coward he was and not by getting his head chopped off. Bottomline is, messengers can not be assailed no matter how evil they are.

Though this thing I can get passed because all I have to do is not watch the EE.

So, the other one is his blatant alterations of the books for no apparent reasons. I'm not talking about some of the big ones because Jackson has explained most of them. The best example I can give is not one of the creditted Dwarves in the Council is named Gloin. There's four dwarves at the Council (and there should only be two-Gimli and his father Gloin), but of the four dwarves, one is Gimli, the others are made up names like Barik and Frarin, or some junk. Gloin is not one of the creditted members. This doesn't get me furious and ruins the movie, in fact it plays little effect to the movie, but it gets me mad because there should be no excuse for not having Gloin at the Council.

I didn't expect him to deliver a speech like he does in the books, that disrupts the flow of the movie and would serve no purpose in the main plot line, but if there's added dwarves I did expect on of them to be creditted as Gloin (the one that SHOULD have been there) and not putting him in the Council I think is a blatant alteration of the books.

There are some other ones, like Jackson switches around letters in named. Instead of Mardil it's Madril in the movies. Instead of Iorlas its Irolas. Either there was a problem when typing the credits or Jackson just felt like changing the names, if it's the latter another blatant alteration.

While these blatant alterations are small they get me to question his statement on "making the movies as close to the books as he possibly could," because these changes show other wise, no matter how small they are.

[mormegil]

Speaking of fairly small changes that irked me. I know it seems fairly petty but the fact the PJ included Merry in the company of the Men of the West was rather irksome. I remember leaving the theater rather annoyed at it. It was one of those simple things that they didn't need to do and yet did.

The Mouth of Sauron bit was explained masterfully by Boromir so I will not go into that here. However there is at least one other thing that bothered me, that is when Sam is sent packing by Frodo. There love was too great for that to ever happen. I just don't agree with that bit at all.

Finally--Faramir.

Overall though I am grateful to PJ and crew because I feel that they did a wonderful job but there are a couple of things that I would change, but of course it wasn't my decision.

[arcticstorm]

There were a few things that made me mad in the movies, first thing was the fact that they Bilbo did not come to the council at all. They did not need to have him tell his story, as it has already been told, but being a ringbearer and haviing a big roll in the story of the ring he should have been there. Also it would have led to some comedy releif not be Gimli, Merry, or Pippin. " Bilbo the sillly hobbit startted this whole affair, and Bilbo the silly hobbit had better finish it."

I also disliked the timing of the reforging of Narsil. It made the weapons scene at the gate of Meduseld less interesting without the debate over Anduril and Gimli's axe. It also made them figure out a reason for Elrond to bring it to him later, and that leads to point 3.Arwen's life being tied to the ring, there is no reason they did this except as I said before, they needed a reason for Elrond to give Aragorn Anduril.

[Kuruharan]

Most Hated Part: Practically the whole Two Towers.

More specifically...

The Fellowship of the Ring: This was by far my favorite of the three. The alterations in this movie were (for the most part) at least reasonably explicable. I still don't understand why Jackson had to make Gandalf the one who was afraid to go to Moria rather than the one who inspired it. The more I see it I am also getting less and less impressed with Jackson's interpretation of the Nazgul. He made them really buffoonish and ineffectual. The part where they are literally riding right on top of the hobbits and can't seem to catch them is really hard to swallow. Of course, on the other hand, Tolkien said that the Nazgul had no great power over the fearless, but still... He also took a page out of Bakshi's movie and turned the Council of Elrond into the Council of Babel (or rather Babble). Galadriel: need I say more?

Oh yes, and the winged (and oversized) Balrog.

Other than these things I found the movie to be pretty enjoyable.

The Two Towers: There is not enough time for me to say all the things that I hated about this movie. Even standing on its own without any reference to Tolkien's work (which I believe is how the script was written) I don't think this movie is any good. Most of the changes were utterly senseless and sabotaged the plot. Even in the midst of all this wreckage, there are a few monstrous warts that stand out for abuse. The entire sequence from the time Theoden decided to go to Helm's Deep until the battle begins is just awful, awful, awful. I don't find there to be a single enjoyable (or even coherent) moment in this bit until the fighting blessedly starts. Then, thankfully, all the annoying pointy-ears die (a just fate for having horned into the plot where they don't belong). The entire sequence from the time Faramir captures Frodo and Sam until the end of the movie is just awful, awful, awful. We witness the savaging of not only Faramir's character but Frodo and Sam become deceitful little sneaks (no wonder Faramir was so suspicious of them). We are also treated to more ineffectual blundering by the Nazgul. Osgiliath: need I say more?

A minor thing, but one that annoyed me, was that Grishnakh and his band were from Isengard and not Mordor.

The Return of the King: I have a fairly positive opinion of this movie, although part of it is probably that it is so much better than The Two Towers. King Elessar the Bloodthirsty Maniac has already received the flogging that is his due. Then there is the Anduril thing. The whole Witch-king vs. Gandalf sequence was just terrible. I was also not too happy with the way Denethor and Gondor's "war preparations" were portrayed. Every time that Gandalf is riding to safety shouting "Get the women and children out!!!" makes me want to scream. I was also not happy that the Orcs broke into two or three levels of the city. This also relates to my disdain for the WK vs. Gandalf bout. I realize Jackson was trying to amp the tension, but once the orcs broke through I found the tension was shattered and the disappointment of defeat set in. It would have been much better to have the confrontation that is in the book. Frodo and Sam and Gollum: need I say more?

I was also passingly annoyed by that inane speech by Gandalf about how "death comes to us all." Well, in Middle-earth, no it doesn't. Gandalf himself only came to it by happenstance not biological imperative.

On the whole, I think most of the problems I have with Jackson's movies stem from his inability to break away from his horror film background and his compulsion to try to cram as much drama into scenes as possible to the point they become unbelievable and almost laughable (several instances of this with the Nazgul).

[The Only Real Estel]

First off, I am not bashing & neither is anyone else so please nobody ask us to stop bashing.

Had to get that out of the way.

Things that I 'stongly disliked' (hate may be too strong a word)

Fellowship of the Ring: Uhhhh. Nothing that I couldn't get over.

Two Towers: Faramir has been redeemed a great deal, IMO, but I still dislike the changes that were made (yes I see why, no I still don't like it). I also greatly dislike Aragorn's 'death' scene. You know, it really would've been fitting if Viggo Mortenson had died during the filming of that scene-than PJ would've seen that the scene really wasn't worth making up.

Return of the King: Denethor's incompetence (sorry Meela ). Frodo sending Sam away (yes I see why, no I still don't like it). Like mormegil, the Mouth of Sauron getting beheaded. An uncharacteristicly unwise move, even for Movie Aragorn.
And another small thing that irked me-you can clearly see that Frodo's finger is only doubled-back when Gollum 'bites it off' in Mount Doom. Do I expect them to really hack off Elijah Wood's finger? No. I do expect the editors to earn their paychecks, though.

Every time that Gandalf is riding to safety shouting "Get the women and children out!!!" makes me want to scream.

Personally I wondered why in the world the women & children weren't moved to a higher level until the orcs broke through.

There are probably a few more things, but on the whole I got over most of my dislikes & disappointments.

[Elrowen Tinúviel]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

Bottomline is, messengers can not be assailed no matter how evil they are.

There's actually been many cities completely obliterated for killing messengers. (A certain incident comes to mind concerning Genghis Khan's messengers he sent to a sheik... the ambassadors were killed, and then the entire city was completely wiped out.)

I must say though, what really irritated me was the lack of Faramir/Eowyn development... in the theatrical version they're seen standing together at the coronation and that's it. Several people I talked to were unaware that the two were even aquainted... much less betrothed. ('Course they hadn't read the books....)

The other things that irritated me are understandable for the most part... Except I still don't understand why the Dúnedain and Elladan and Elrohir never showed up. Possibly because Peter Jackson didn't want to add any more characters than he had to? (Arwen?????) That, and the Elves showing up at Helm's Deep...

-Elrowen

[drigel]

Most of my gripes are already expounded upon. I will throw in the "frantically searching flaming eyeball" atop Barad Dur when it crashes. ugh soooo anticlimactic for me.... i recall the eye of Sauron, but not the eyeball of Sauron..

[ninja91]

I kind of wish that they had the scene with the Barrow-Wights and Tom Bombadil. That (to me) was a real good (and scary) part of book 1. But then again, thats just me.
Also, I would also have liked to see Prince Imrahil.
There were alot of places that I would have liked to see portrayed, such as: Harad, Pelargir, Dol Amroth, the Tower Hills, Angmar, Nurn, and the City of the Corsairs. Not to mention Erech, Annuminas, and Dol Guldur.
I guess I'll just have to use my imagination...

[Texadan]

This has been mentioned for individuals but looking at it as a whole the thing I am most disappointed in is that most, if not all, of the character changes are for the worse. I've listened to the commentaries and I understand PJ & Co.'s reasoning that there must be action and conflict for a movie audience (even if I don't necessarily agree with it), but every time they changed a character to produce more story it lessened that character. The changes in Faramir that made him so much less than he should be have been mentioned. As has the changing of the Rohirrim from a people of courage and valor to crying cowards and Frodo's harshness with Sam. The same thing was done, to a greater or lesser degree, to Aragorn, Arwen, Elrond, and the Ents. I'm sorry, but I think we need examples of people of character and valor in our fiction these days more than we need conflict. Conflict we are familiar with. The other, not so much.