PJ's butchering of the stories

I am fully aware of the fact that he couldnt have left all of the storyline in the movies, but am I the only one that found it totally unessesary to add that part with Aragorn falling off the cliff? *I* think that it was an attempt to give Arwen more undeserving screentime by having her come to him in a vision of some sort... and on top of that I've discovered a site that has what they claim to be the full list of changes in RotK, and I find some of them VERY angering. Here is the site, but I must warn you that it has MAJOR spoilers....: <A HREF="http://www.tolkienonline.com/movies/changes_rotk.cfm" TARGET=_blank>null</A><A HREF="http://www.tolkienonline.com/movies/changes_rotk.cfm" TARGET=_blank>here</A>

[Novnarwen]

Hmm... Reading all that, really hurts. How is it possible?<P>Just a few thoughts....<P>Saruman; What's with the: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>"Wizard impaled on spiked wheel." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>That's just awful. Wormtounge was supposed to kill him! The mighty Saruman isn't supposed to die, when falling on a spiked wheel!<P>Aargornn; <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>"Arwen helps Aragorn Use Palantír."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <BR>Aragorn can do <B>that</B> by himself, right?<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>"Scouring of the Shire Cut"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Now, that one hurts the most. The Sourcing of the Shire is a great part of LOTR. They can't cut that! <P>First of all, the hobbits are to be the heros in the Shire. Don't they deserve that?<BR>And, the whole point about Saruman being full with revenge, is lost. It's madness!<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> "Sauron Makes Rare Public Appearance"<BR>FILMS: Sauron appears in a form other than the Flaming Eye.<BR>BOOKS: Sauron does not directly appear, although according to Gollum, he does have a humanoid form. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>This is just wrong. Very wrong.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> "Wounded Faramir Dragged by Horse"<BR>FILMS: When Faramir retreats from his defense of Osgiliath, he is pierced by many arrows and is brought into Minas Tirith dragged by his horse.<BR>BOOKS: Faramir is pierced by only a single dart, and Prince Imrahil carries him back to Minas Tirith.<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>They have cut out Imrahil! Noooo.<P>***<P>Thanks for providing this *great* link. But I must say, being honest, that I regret I read it. <P>Nova <P><I>There is a thread, just like this one, I think: <A HREF="http://forum.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=002317" TARGET=_blank>RotK Rumors - Share yours! **POSSIBLE SPOILERS* </A> </I> <p>[ November 16, 2003: Message edited by: Novnarwen ]

[dancing spawn of ungoliant]

I read part of all those storyline changings... but I must say that I wouldn't really count on that site's credibility! There has been pics floating around the Net of Saruman on a spiked wheel but many consider that it's just "one way to die" they shot. But we'll see. After a month we can drop the speculation of what'll be included in the film and what has been left out.

[Imladris]

I believe I heard somewhere that RotK is the least changed of the trilogy. Judging from the first two (granted they changed some but only two major plot points were changed, ie, the elves at Helm's Deep and Frodo), I doubt that PJ would change it that much. Heck, in the book Eowyn wasn't even at Orthanc.<P>Edit: thanks, HC. I guess we cross posted...very interesting. Hard not to read it!<p>[ November 16, 2003: Message edited by: Imladris ]

[HCIsland]

Folks, read the credibility ratings at the bottom of these. Many of them are already out of date.<P><A HREF="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0167260/board/thread/2772149" TARGET=_blank>Here's a better link,</A><BR><A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/hcisland/tolkien.htm" TARGET=_blank>or you can try mine.</A><P>H.C.<p>[ November 16, 2003: Message edited by: HCIsland ]

[Silmiel of Imladris]

Some I believe and some I don't. Besides according to the preview it is Elrond that gives Aragorn the sword. One that I truely believe is how the movie ends with the voiceover by Galadriel for that is how I always imagined it.

[The Saucepan Man]

I have posted my views on the changes in the films too many times on too many threads to repeat them all here. Suffice it to say that I have no problem, per se, with Jackson and co making changes. These films are <I>adaptations</I> of the books, they are not (and never could be) accurate representations of the books. The only changes that I dislike are the ones that don't make sense in the context of the films (and Aragorn being dragged over the cliff by the Hyena-Lemming hybrid is one of those - it was gratuitous).<P>The omission of the Scouring of the Shire has been known (and debated on this forum) for some time. Personally, although it is one of my favourite chapters, I see this as a good decision. A mini-climax following Sauron's defeat would not work well on film following the major climax of Frodo's struggle at Mount Doom and Sauron's defeat.<P>I have no problem with Sauron appearing in physical form in the film, although it remains open to debate whether this will actually happen. Sauron fighting Aragron at the Black Gate, which is another rumour that has been going round, now seems unlikely to happen.<P>The rest of the changes have either since been discredited, or are true but really rather minor.<P>Except, that is, for those involving Saruman and Wormtongue. If only they were true. But things have moved on. It now seems pretty clear that they won't even feature in RotK. <BR><A HREF="http://forum.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=002423&p=1" TARGET=_blank>Here is a thread which addresses this.</A> Personally, I think that this is Jackson's biggest mistake so far.

[The Only Real Estel]

I'm mostly posting here on Novnarwen's post.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>That's just awful. Wormtounge was supposed to kill him! The mighty Saruman isn't supposed to die, when falling on a spiked wheel!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Wormtounge does kill Saruman, he just tumbles onto a spiked wheel after being thrown off of Orthanc. <P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>"Arwen helps Aragorn Use Palantír." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>That sounds extremly doubtful to me (no time to check the credibility rating, but if it has one, it's probably not a good one). <P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>the whole point about Saruman being full with revenge, is lost.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>It's unlikely Saruman would've been filled with anything bought an iron spike at that point in time.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>There is a thread, just like this one, I think<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>True, there are many of them, actually pretty much everything here is old news to 99% of the people here.<P>I can't say that I'm a big fan of Sauron appearing, but it will help matters some if he <B>doesn't</B> fight Aragorn (which doesn't look likely, as SPMan said). It was probably for the best to cut the Scouring, but it was an extremly ill-chosen move to dump Saruman & Grima until the EE.<p>[ November 17, 2003: Message edited by: The Only Real Estel ]

[Novnarwen]

<B>Saucepan Man wrote:</B><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> The omission of the Scouring of the Shire has been known (and debated on this forum) for some time. Personally, although it is one of my favourite chapters, I see this as a good decision. A mini-climax following Sauron's defeat would not work well on film following the major climax of Frodo's struggle at Mount Doom and Sauron's defeat.<P> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>As for me, I think ending the story in the Shire, where it originally began, would have been splendid. I believe it would help those who haven't read the books to get a more *complete* picture. Plus, the major climax is *almost* the death of Saruman in the Shire and the Hobbits' fight for *freedom* <P>***<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Wormtounge does kill Saruman, he just tumbles onto a spiked wheel after being thrown off of Orthanc. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>He does?<P>Okay, must have missed it. <P>Cheers,<BR>Nova<p>[ 12:11 PM November 26, 2003: Message edited by: Novnarwen ]

I don't think you guys should be as hard as you are on the movies, I think it is a masterpeice in the undertaking in both forms, so they may change things a little, it livens up the seriousness of the stories and it may encourage more people to recognize Tolkien as a genious.

[Knight of Gondor]

I can contest many of these rumors personally. (*Spoilers*)<P>Movie opens with Narsil reforging:<BR>The word I have is that it opens with Smeagol and Deagol, since that wasn't in the TTT:EE. (Was it? I haven't finished it yet, but the best place for it was in the Dead Marshes)<P>Arwen and/vs. Eowyn:<P>Arwen stays in Rivendell, Elrond takes sword. Notice he is the only one present in the tent at the time. In the visual companion, Arwen is sick.<P>Gandalf doesn't take Palantir:<BR>For sure this is wrong, because there is a picture of Pippin stealing it from Gandalf!<P>Eowyn does not kill Wormtongue. In the now-cut scene, Legolas did.<P>There is NO WAY Arwen has to help Aragorn. But rumor is the Evenstar pendant shatters when Aragorn looks in the Palantir and is shown Arwen, lying dead.<P>Faramir IS dragged by horse, but don't lose hope in Imrahil yet!<P>There are a lot more, some of them credible, some of them not. I don't have time to refute them all, but just keep in mind that you cannot trust hardly any of these reports fully.

[Lord Elrond]

I think it will end in the shire, just not with the scouring of the shire. Peter Jackson took many liberties in the first two movies some that are completely out of context with the book and some that don't disturb it too much. I don't think Aragorn falling off a cliff or the whole flashbacks with Arwen are necessary however it is better than what he had planned to do and have Arwen come to Helm's Deep. That would have just been worse. Let's face it there is no way a money loving director from Hollywood wouldn't just leave the book in true form. Anyone in the entertainment business wants to do one of two things, put their individual ideas into it or make money off of it. THis explains most of the mistakes PJ did. As for what will happen in ROTK we will just have to see. There are so many rumors I suggest you guys stop reading up on what might happen and just wait to see what does happen. It is much more exciting and you don't spoil it for yourselves. Do you really want to know all the inns and outs of the movie before just watching it. Enjoy the movie. PJ is not Tolkien, yes there will be things we will not be happy about, that's HOLLYWOOD. We all know what should and shouldn't happen that's enough to know.

[lindil]

Welcome to the Barrow Downs Fangorn Forest [and Valandil]!<P>although I must take a moment to say that I can not characterize pj's [or fran and phillipa's] adaptations as ' ... they may change things a little']. <P>I feel your pain Valandil, although hopefully many of the gratuitous changes such as Saruman on a spiked wheel have gone the way of Xenarwen [one nice thing in the exTTT app. is that we the fans helped change the course of Arwen in the movies ].<P>Personally I can understand leaving things out, such as [alas] the Scouring of the Shire and the events between Buckland and Bree, although they could have been left out a little better and perhaps flashed back when Frodo is recovering in Rivendell as at least quick blurry feverish dreams read by Gandalf [as the book mentions]. For me though, and omission is very different from the many major and even more minor changes. <P>It hurts, to see such incredible scnery, special effects, costuming, good casting and acting [for the most part], etc all damaged by major character re-motivations. Arwen, Elrond, Aragorn, Faramir all become 'variations on a theme'. A more honest title for the films would have been, <B>Almost The Lord of the Rings</B>.<P>To give PJ and co a little more credit, it is all the more frustrating that they do some scenes with such aplomb: Gandalf at the Bridge], the extended Lothlorien, much of the Shire, etc. That to see PJ stumble over the simple rule of sticking to the characterizations and storyline of the book is sad. <P>A 200 million dollar monument to our favorite fictional world that is permanently enshrined with graffiti. Of course everyone will experience the Movies in their own way, and I am just explaining my responses. Personally I would not at all be suprised to hear PJ [or the writing duo] express regret in a few years [or more] once these folks have distanced themselves from the hoopla and sit down and read the books again, and really feel how far they diverged.<P>Of course I have read [and heard from the horse's [phillipa and PJ] mouths their justifications for ever major change, but I am sorry, I think if they had used 1/2 of the energy they put into re-writing the story into figuring out how to faithfully bring the books to life we find a glowing reception amongst newbies, oldtimers and purists alike.<P>Those who had the good fortune to see Children of Dune recently will know exactly what I mean. The little peek I took into various Dune boards afterwards showed a virtual 100% approval [and astonishment] at the faithfullnes] for the effort. <P>No the movies [so far] are not horrible, they are not bad, they are not poor, they are not even average, they are in so many respects amazing, but when it comes to the essence of the story, PJ could not resist the temptation of the power to remake the movies according to his fancy, any more than Frodo could at the end resist the Ring. Unfortunately there was no Gollum to bite into PJ's finger and bring him back to reality.<p>[ 1:46 AM November 27, 2003: Message edited by: lindil ]

[The Saucepan Man]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Unfortunately there was no Gollum to bite into PJ's finger and bring him back to reality. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Ah, lindil, but I think that Mr Jackson is very much in the realm of reality, the reality that is of bringing these films to a mass audience, and of meeting the demands of those providing him with the funds to enable him to do so. <P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Personally I would not at all be suprised to hear PJ [or the writing duo] express regret in a few years <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I would be very surprised were they to feel this way. Rather, I hope that they continue to look back on these films with immense affection and pride, since I feel that they (and the entire cast and production crew) have much to be proud about, especially given the above-mentioned demands.

[Essex]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>PJ is not Tolkien, yes there will be things we will not be happy about, that's HOLLYWOOD. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Thankfully it's NOT Hollywood, but I know what you're saying, Lord Elrond. I think we would have had a major disaster on our hands if a 'hollywood' style director got his hands on it. I at least give Jackon credence for that!<P>[ 9:46 AM November 27, 2003: Message edited by: Essex ]<p>[ 9:47 AM November 27, 2003: Message edited by: Essex ]

[ArathorofBarahir]

I think that all of these cuts are necessary to keep the movie moving at a good pace, plus some of the changes help give the movie better visuals. But that just my opinion.

[Northman]

I know many of you will not agree with me but i think Jackson has done a great job with the movies. The things we love about the books that didnt make it in to the movies were left out because they would make the movie longer and even more confussing for the non book reading audience. I like the scouring chapter but it wold cost a lot and take time away from more important scenes like Aragorn being made king. Understand how har making a movie from a book is.

[Gorwingel]

I do have to agree with Saucepan about the whole removing of Saurman and Grima thing. This is the only thing that has really been bothering me. I also heard something about them completely removing the Houses of Healing, so that is kind of worrying me too. I am a little mad about what I have been hearing recently about the cuts, because originally I heard that New Line had been so happy with what they were seeing that they were going to let the film be as long as it needed to be.<P>I have not been too terribly mad about most of the cuts that have been made. The only thing I am really still kind of ticked off about are the changes to Faramir's personality. Even with the greater explaination in TTT:EE, I still don't understand why they had to make him so mean.<P>We will all of course have to see ROTK, and then watch all three films as a whole to see how they flow. Because maybe when you see everything together the changes are not as bad as we originally thought.

[Everdawn]

I must be one of the few who likes the changes that Peter Jackson has made. Is it really that bad if he does change it a little? I mean you will always have the books but it is a more wholesome cinematic exprence he is creating for us you know.

There's original art, and there's adaptive art. Tolkien was an original artist, a visionary genius. There are few original artists in the world (Mozart, Beethoven, Daugerre, Frank Lloyd Wright, to name a few). There are many more adaptive artists; that is, those who are inspired by the works of others and re-interpret and create according to their own vision. Jackson is an adaptive artist, but his vision is great in its own right. I suggest we appreciate Peter Jackson for his own genius and his films as their own visual/story entities. We will always have the books; now we have the wonderful cinematic experience of watching some of the characters "come to life" on screen. One may be based upon the other, but that doesn't make it any less great. The world can always use another genius - thanks, Peter Jackson!

[Eurytus]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> There's original art, and there's adaptive art. Tolkien was an original artist, a visionary genius. There are few original artists in the world (Mozart, Beethoven, Daugerre, Frank Lloyd Wright, to name a few). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Are there any?<BR>Pretty much all art is inspired by or influenced by those that have gone before. It would well nigh impossible for it to be otherwise. Tolkien of course was likewise imfluenced and was the first to admit it..<BR>I would struggle to think of one piece of totally original art.<P>Although Derek Jarman's film Blue must come close. A film that totally consists of a blue screen.<P>That was not to say that it wasn't crap though...

[ainur]

I don't mind most of the changes P.J. has made to the films. Even I wouldn't sit through a film that was 100% faithful. (It would take about 60-80 hours I figure) The only changes he made that bother me are when he strays completely from anything Tolkien wrote, or even from the logic of what Tolkien wrote. Like Aragorn falling off a cliff and having visions of Arwen. Like Frodo showing the Ring to the Nazgul in Osgiliath. (I didn't mind him being there, but holding up the Ring was just silly. He would have been devoured no matter what Faramir shot at the Ringwraith).<P>I think for the most part, Peter Jackson has done a monumental thing and has given the world three spectacular movies. They weren't the first time this story has been put on film, and they probably won't be the last. (How many "A Christmas Carols" have you seen, or "Draculas"?) If you don't much like this one just wait. Another will come along sooner or later. Some of you might even be part of that future creation. For me, I'm am (mostly) very impressed. (In fact, I'm already anxious for the Return of the King EE release!--I can't wait.)

[Sapphire_Flame]

Here are my thoughts on those "changes":<P><B>Third Film Opens With Narsil Being Reforged</B> - No. It actually opens with a flashback to when Deagol and Smeagol find the Ring. *This is stated in a magazine article; PJ himself verified it.*<P><B>Eowyn Can't Compete With Arwen</B> - No; Elrond, not Arwen, brings Anduril to Aragorn. We all saw this bit in the trailer people, come on.<P><B>Gandalf Never Takes Palantír</B> - False; Gandalf does get it, and then Pippin steals it. There are pictures to confirm this.<P><B>Arwen helps Aragorn Use Palantír</B> - The "Credibility Rating" on this one was a big, fat *ZERO!* Come on people, really...<P><B>Merry and Pippin Wake Up in Edoras</B> - Yes. There are pictures of this, including the ones of Pippin stealing the palantir. It seems they go to Edoras instead of back to Helm's Deep.<P><B>Scouring of the Shire Cut</B> - *sobs* This is the saddest change. That was my favorite part in the books!<P>A lot of these I don't really believe, like the Elves showing up at the Black Gate (I think Lorien had enough problems of its own at the moment...). I think I'll just wait it out, and see what happens in December.<P>Abedithon le,<P>~*~Aranel~*~

[The Only Real Estel]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I must be one of the few who likes the changes that Peter Jackson has made. Is it really that bad if he does change it a little? I mean you will always have the books but it is a more wholesome cinematic exprence he is creating for us you know. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>O, there's nothing wrong with little changes. I rarely hear any complaints about the excellerated departure from Rivendell, Frodo not dancing on tables at Bree, Elrond calling people to him for a council, Lurtz being added, amplified odds at Helm's Deep (I've heard a tiny bit on that), etc., etc. Why, I haven't even heard much on Gandalf's curing of Theoden, which is certainly pushing 'larger changes'. It's the bigger changes that get me/the many who agree with me on the subject. You probably know which ones I'm talking about...

[pandora]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> I rarely hear any complaints about ... Lurtz being added, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Perhaps that's because it goes without saying that it was a terrible idea?<P>The worst overall problem has been Arwen: the whole story has been skewed by her for no end. Did anyone go to see these films because Liv Tylor was in them?<P>I am tempted to get/borrow the DVDs and do a re-edit. Given the amount of material on them it must be possible to do a decent cut out of it all.

[The Only Real Estel]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Perhaps that's because it goes without saying that it was a terrible idea? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I dunno about that, it at least fit with the scene fairly well. I mean, most people think that Faramir was a terrible idea, but there's still plenty of talk about him to go around (mostly from me, admittedly ).

[yavanna II]

it's ok to have a little change, "the only constant in the world is change", and good thing mr jackson put the part where smeagol & deagol went fishing--but it isn't very nice of him to do a lot of changes! i really want to kill him, but i....am supposed to be a good girl.

[Jjudvven]

I'm a member of the Lord of the Rings Fan Club and I have been reading for some time about the changes from the mouth of PJ himself.<BR>As I believe was stated earlier, there will be no Scouring of the Shire. This was one of my favorite chapters in the books, but I can see why they left it out of the movie.<BR>Wormtongue kills Saruman by pushing him out of the Tower of Orthanc. This was verified in the magazine as well. I think that Legolas goes on to kill Worm, but I'm not entirely sure about that one.<BR>I never read anything at all about the Houses of Healing, except online, and that's not the most reliable way to find out good information, so for now, I'm going to discredit that rumor. That part in the books really helped to show who Aragorn really was.<BR>I'm not sure about this one, but I heard that Gimli was going to fight the Mouth of Sauron. Can someone clear this up? I read it online, but I'm somewhat doubt the truth.<BR>As to the Eagles, I don't think they come to help out with the Battle at the Black Gate, but I know that they do come abnd rescue Sam and Frodo from Mt. Doom.<BR>I also read(online) that Arwen will be having a significantly smaller role in these movies than in the other two. This is a great relief to me. I think the battle-heroin part should have been left to Eowyn alone. <BR>I also heard a rumor that the Orc armies will actually enter the lower levels of Minis Tirith. I'm not sure if this is true or not. Does anyone else know?<BR>From what I have seen, they will do the scene with Faramir and the Pyre of Denethor right, which will be nice to see.<BR>And does anyone know whether they will show the wedding between Aragorn and Arwen? It seems after so much attempted romantic buildup that they couldn't just completely skip this part, which I heard that they might.<P>Overall, I have been impressed with the quality of the films, and am a firm supported. I do, of, course, think that there are many things that should have been different. But there's no pleasing everyone, right?<BR>The worst problems I had with the Fellowship was the portrayal of the Elves. In my opinion, there was nothing "elvish" about them. Many of them were downright ugly! And Haldir! Oh my goodness that man can't pass off as an elf any more than Peter Jackson! Other than a few faults though, PJ did an outstanding job on the FotR.<BR>On TTT, I had many more problems, the worst of which was the portrayal of Faramir as a cowardly wimp, eager to impress his father. I read PJ's explanation of this, and it made some since, but I still think his character was slaughtered in the movie. I hope they can redeem him in the third film.<BR>The other problem I had was Aragorn falling off the cliff. That scene was, to me, completely pointless and uncalled for except to make Aragorn look stupid floating down the river like that. <BR>I wasn't as impressed with the Two Towers and I was with the Fellowship, but I see some good things coming with the Return of the King.

[Sapphire_Flame]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I also heard a rumor that the Orc armies will actually enter the lower levels of Minis Tirith. I'm not sure if this is true or not. Does anyone else know?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>It certainly looked that way in the trailer shown on the TT DVD (theatrical).<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>And does anyone know whether they will show the wedding between Aragorn and Arwen? It seems after so much attempted romantic buildup that they couldn't just completely skip this part, which I heard that they might.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Yeah, I've heard they have it in. I've seen some pictures floating around somewhere, but the exact site escapes me at the moment...<P>Oh, and Jjudvven, I thoroughly agree with your closing statement; I loved the films, aside from the bits you noted. RotK will undoubtedly be the best of the three, in spite of whatever changes.<P>Abedithon le,<P>~*~Aranel~*~

[Lord of Angmar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> I have posted my views on the changes in the films too many times on too many threads to repeat them all here. Suffice it to say that I have no problem, per se, with Jackson and co making changes. (The Saucepan Man)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I concur.<P>I did not click on and read the content of the initial link, as I have the rather hopeless wish of knowing as little as possible about the upcoming <I>Return of the King</I> movie. However, I do feel qualified to add my two cents to the ever-heated debate of PJ's "butchering" or altering of the books.<P>To address the initial post by Valandil about the addition of Aragorn's fall over the cliff, I would like to defend Peter Jackson. In all fairness, I think that he deserves credit for adding such a situation to the <I>Two Towers</I>. In Professor Tolkien's books, one thing I always found a little disconcerting was that the reader was never presented with any specific scenes in which Aragorn faced extreme mortal danger. Even in the case of Aragorn's defense of the hobbits at Weathertops, I never felt a sense of great danger for Aragorn. Nor did I glean such a sense from the "Paths of the Dead" chapter or any of the battles that he fought thereafter. Since the movies have thus far attempted to expand upon Aragorn's character and turn him into more of a classical epic hero (as I am absolutely sure based on the <I>Return of the King</I> previews they will continue to do), the logical situation would be to set up the viewer with at least one instance in which he comes within an inch of his life, a life-or-death scene to bring us closer to the plight of the character. While the effectiveness of the entire Warg Rider sequence can be debated (I found it, for the most part, rather enjoyable), I feel that it was necessary for the character of Aragorn to face such a challenge, from a cinematic perspective.<P>As I have said earlier, the omission of the "Scouring of the Shire" was a necessary evil from the perspective of the producers of the movie trilogy. Such an epic movie could not sustain an anti-climactic epilogue which would, in essence, diverge into a completely different plot from the rest of the <I>Return of the King</I> movie. <P>I have tried not to read too in depth into this thread, since, as I have said, I do not wish to hear too many spoilers. I certainly hope that Arwen does not "help" Aragorn use the <I>palantir</I>. That would be a wholly unnecessary stretch.<P>Cheers,<BR>Angmar

[Everdawn]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Many of them were downright ugly! And Haldir! Oh my goodness that man can't pass off as an elf any more than Peter Jackson <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Woah! Dude! Never diss Haldir... I thought that Craig Parker looked hands down hot! I thought the elves were wonderful, they are my fav. part of the film! And i did enjoy their inclusion in Helms Deep, even though it wasnt in the book.

[Jjudvven]

Well, each to his or her own I guess. I'm sorry, but to me, Haldir was just plain U-G-L-Y. <BR>And the Elves coming to Helms Deep was cheesy and unnecessary. I forgot to mention that above.