Major Changes from the 📔Book to the Film

Despite my nit-picking weenie, purists tendencies, I thought that other than the 'go home Sam', and the piggish, disgusting Denethor, RoTK was the best movie out of all three as far as the regular cinematic versions go.
FoTR Extended Edition is the best movie out of all of them. Both the movie and EE of TTT was borderline garbage in my opinion.

My biggest problem with the movies is threefold:

1) The excuse many of us were given by movie defenders (including PJ) to justify differences was 'There is too much to fit in. We don't have enought time to make a truly faithful adaptation of the movie'. But what PJ et.al did was add so much of their own creation that most of the time did nothing to help the story and most times took away from it. If you can't fit in all of Tolkien in the movie, why take Tolkien out and add **** in it's place? That is a lame excuse.

2) PJ changed the characters, sometimes drastically, by giving them words of another person, changing their motives and actions, many of which only confused the story and created contradictions. For example, Arwen becomes some warrior princess and takes the thunder away from 4 Tolkien characters in the book, only to become the gentle princess she was written as in the second movie. Faramir becomes a bully like his brother, going against his discerning and noble nature from Tolkien's Faramir only to come back to what he was originally written as. Aragorn denies his birthright, shirks his responsibility and sends Arwen away. A complete 180 from what he was in the book. A king in waiting for the right time to take his crown and get the girl. Theoden is a cowardly jerk who only comes around in the last movie...again, just like Tolkien had written him as to begin with.

3) PJ's use of slapstick humor, buffoonery, ridiculous dialogue and dumbing down some of the story for the audience. Pippin and Merry in the first two movies, Gimli throughout, idiotic phrases like 'Give us the halfing she elf'. 'Let him go or I'll have you Longshanks', 'Don't I get one of those nice, shiny daggers?', 'He's moving because my axe is in his nervous system', 'Nobody tosses a dwarf' etc, etc, ad nauseum.

You forgot to complain of PJ's trick of putting himself on scene more than an extra.

Watch out for PJ's return in 'The Hobbit'.

Originally posted by RangerStryder
Watch out for PJ's return in 'The Hobbit'.

Click to expand...

The Great Goblin (but I think he lost some weight, so that might not pan out).

Hm, I thought that was Yay I was sitting beside during each movie, complaining and fussing much of the time. Seems now it was Thorin.

You and I think much alike! You named almost everything that threw me into near apoplexy.

Thorin said:

RoTK was the best movie out of all three as far as the regular cinematic versions go. (I agree wholeheartedly)

My biggest problem with the movies is threefold: (Your analysis was great)

1) The excuse many of us were given by movie defenders (including PJ) to justify differences was 'There is too much to fit in. We don't have enought time to make a truly faithful adaptation of the movie'. But what PJ et.al did was add so much of their own creation that most of the time did nothing to help the story and most times took away from it. If you can't fit in all of Tolkien in the movie, why take Tolkien out and add **** in it's place? That is a lame excuse.

2) PJ changed the characters, sometimes drastically, by giving them words of another person, changing their motives and actions, many of which only confused the story and created contradictions. For example, Arwen becomes some warrior princess and takes the thunder away from 4 Tolkien characters in the book, only to become the gentle princess she was written as in the second movie. Faramir becomes a bully like his brother, going against his discerning and noble nature from Tolkien's Faramir only to come back to what he was originally written as. Aragorn denies his birthright, shirks his responsibility and sends Arwen away. A complete 180 from what he was in the book. A king in waiting for the right time to take his crown and get the girl. Theoden is a cowardly jerk who only comes around in the last movie...again, just like Tolkien had written him as to begin with.

3) PJ's use of slapstick humor, buffoonery, ridiculous dialogue and dumbing down some of the story for the audience. Pippin and Merry in the first two movies, Gimli throughout, idiotic phrases like 'Give us the halfing she elf'. 'Let him go or I'll have you Longshanks', 'Don't I get one of those nice, shiny daggers?', 'He's moving because my axe is in his nervous system', 'Nobody tosses a dwarf' etc, etc, ad nauseum.

Click to expand...

Dear Thorin, Your analysis of the flaws to the films was great !! I hope that The Hobbit will be better...

Originally posted by Thorin
My biggest problem with the movies is threefold:

1) The excuse many of us were given by movie defenders (including PJ) to justify differences was 'There is too much to fit in. We don't have enought time to make a truly faithful adaptation of the movie'. But what PJ et.al did was add so much of their own creation that most of the time did nothing to help the story and most times took away from it.

2) PJ changed the characters, sometimes drastically, by giving them words of another person, changing their motives and actions, many of which only confused the story and created contradictions.

3) PJ's use of slapstick humor, buffoonery, ridiculous dialogue and dumbing down some of the story for the audience.

Click to expand...

I have to say your assessment is pretty much spot on, and of course it would have been better to do as you suggested (if that were even possible). However, none of those flaws bothered me even slightly. I actually found some of what you criticized quite amusing.

Originally posted by ltnjmy
Dear Thorin, Your analysis of the flaws to the films was great !! I hope that The Hobbit will be better...

Click to expand...

Better? I wouldn't bet on it. I think that when The Hobbit is released, and people see that it doesn't quite measure up to the significance of the LoTR Trilogy, they will finally appreciate the difficult and monumental task Jackson was able to pull off. Do you know how difficult it is to make even a really bad, low grade "B movie" (to say nothing of making a movie good enough to win an Oscar)? And RoTK tied the record for winning "the most" awards in the history of movie making. PJ obviously did something right, and I seriously doubt The Hobbit will be on the same level. The logic of NPW thinking baffles my brain. I say; life is short, enjoy the little gifts that are given to you. If not, go out and make a better version of the Trilogy yourselves.

Illuin said:

If not, go out and make a better version of the Trilogy yourselves.

Click to expand...

That last sentence is a bit snippy.

Overall, the FOTR & ROTK were very good, but Thorin did an excellent job in posting out the failings which did disappoint me, a life-long Tolkien fan. Why would I want to go out and make a better film myself ?

Originally posted by ltnjmy
Why would I want to go out and make a better film myself ?

Click to expand...

I think my statement is self explanatory. Perhaps it would give you more of an appreciation for the mountain PJ had to climb making the Trilogy. Anyway, Thorin and I are at war , and have been for quite some time; so I was indirectly talking to him. We are complete polar opposites when it comes to our views on the movies. It's all in good fun though (for me anyway ). Just wait until The Hobbit is released. One, or maybe both of us will probably get banned.

Illuin said:

I think my statement is self explanatory. Perhaps it would give you more of an appreciation for the mountain PJ had to climb making the Trilogy. Anyway, Thorin and I are at war , and have been for quite some time; so I was indirectly talking to him. We are complete polar opposites when it comes to our views on the movies.

Click to expand...

Illuin, your date of joining is only last year. Were you Illuin before and just rejoined?

As far as being polar opposites... The 9 years I've been on this forum that I have expressed and said that what PJ did right he did GOOD and I have always given credit where credit is due. What I have seen as nonsense, I have called it as such. There are some purists who wouldn't budge an inch and found fault with nearly every deviation. There have also been film defenders that seem to think every change and deviation PJ did was fully justifiable and even improved on Tolkien's story!

I believe that I have found a more happier medium (well, maybe a little more on the purist side) in finding a balance between faithfulness to Tolkien and cinematic liberties.

It has been a fun ride and I encourage every newbie to go search through the archives to see some of the arguments that occurred when the movies first came out.

Originally posted by Thorin
As far as being polar opposites...

Click to expand...

Alright, let's just say 135 degrees then . Actually, I think we are in close agreement with the changes we feel are necessary concerning The Hobbit movie (if I remember correctly).

Gosh. "Now if you've finished hosing down the decks with testosterone..." (name that quote Illuin!), back on topic.

Let's see. My biggest problems were...

1) The Xenarwen thing. I just can't get over that one. I gag every time I see Liv Tyler pick up a sword.

2) The fact that they showed Faramir as being possibly corrupted. He knew right were he stood the whole time in the book.

3) The "go home Sam" thing, of course. Heart-wrenching, I'll give that to PJ, but not true to the book.

4) I wish they'd done a better job showing the passage of time. for example, Frodo gets the Ring, Gandalf leaves the Shire, Gandalf returns to the Shire...the movie made it seem like all that happened in the course of days, yet in reality (or as close to reality as we're going to get in a piece of fiction! ), it was YEARS later that Gandalf came back with his "this is the One Ring" news.

5) The Scouring of the Shire...now this, I understand, was probably cut due to time restrictions, but there was certainly a way around that. For example, towards the end of ROTK when Frodo is speaking as a narrator, talking about them returning to the Shire, etc, it would have taken maybe two more minutes of dialogue to say something to the effect of "We returned to the Shire to find that the reach of Sauruman had extended even to our beloved Shire. But with the expriece gained on our long journey a Battle was fought, and re reclaimed the shire for the Hobbits...." or somthing like that. Just SOMETHING to acknowledge that the shire did not remain untouched. One of my favorite aspects of Tolkien is that he developed his characters very well, and part of that development for the Hobbits was that in the end they had learned enough and become brave enough to not need help from the outside world to hold on to and fight for what was most deaer to them. So, that in mind, I was upset that the Scouring of the Shire was cut.

I think that covers the big ones for me.

However, to Thorin,

...and the piggish, disgusting Denethor...

Click to expand...

I was quite pleased with John Noble's portrayal of Denethor was quite good. I hated him, pitied him, and though he was quite mad, and that fufilled the basic points that I saw in Tolkien's version of the character.

Gosh. "Now if you've finished hosing down the decks with testosterone..." (name that quote Illuin!), back on topic.

Click to expand...

Lost In Space (we have to stop doing this ).

Illuin said:

Lost In Space (we have to stop doing this ).

Click to expand...

Correct...and says who? lol It's fun.

Firawyn said:

I was quite pleased with John Noble's portrayal of Denethor was quite good. I hated him, pitied him, and though he was quite mad, and that fufilled the basic points that I saw in Tolkien's version of the character.

Click to expand...

Were we watching the same Denethor??

In the book Denethor was not a bitter, crazed madman. The actions and attitude of everything Denethor did in the movie was just not like the book. From his overdespising of Faramir, his piggish eating habits, his erratic behavior when Faramir was believed dead, his losing it on his men 'Run for you liiiives!!' and then his getting clocked with the staff by Gandalf.

Ack! I could go on and on!!!

It was almost as much a catastrophe as Arwen at the Fords.

I completely agree, Thorin.

The only other character other than Denethor that seemed as completely out of character was Theoden. I mean...c'mon. Once he was rid of Wormtongue, the man was virile, alive and ready to defend his homeland once more. Granted, he was cautious, but wisely so, as befits one who knows the terrain and had a good working knowledge of past conflicts. He was one of my favourites in the books and to see him portrayed as sneering and cowardly by turns, until at last hitting his stride, disgusted me.

And what was with the whole diseased/possessed/covered-in-cobwebs look? Had I been Aragorn, I'd have written him off as having some form of incurable somethingorother. "Uh, guys...I'll just be over here...next to the door. Downwind, if you get my drift." Ew!

Were we watching the same Denethor??

Click to expand...

Thorin, while I have no doubt that we did indeed watch the same movies, I must admit that I did not become a "book fan", until after the first movie had come out. By the time Return of the King had come out, I had made it through the books only once or twice, and had not had much time to really do a detailed analysis of the character. I'm working my way through RotK presently, and perhaps my opinion will change once I get there. BUT, from my recollections, I was not unhappy with that character.

They fact that Chrys agrees with you, Thorin, and I usually agree with her, means that it is very likely that I will have an abrupt change of opinion here very shortly, and you will have to forgive my ignorance.

However, I do agree wholeheartedly...Arwen at the Fords...ACK!

Fir-

Thorin said:

Were we watching the same Denethor??

In the book Denethor was not a bitter, crazed madman. The actions and attitude of everything Denethor did in the movie was just not like the book. From his overdespising of Faramir, his piggish eating habits, his erratic behavior when Faramir was believed dead, his losing it on his men 'Run for you liiiives!!' and then his getting clocked with the staff by Gandalf.

Ack! I could go on and on!!!

It was almost as much a catastrophe as Arwen at the Fords.

Click to expand...

Differences between book and film aside, I thought Noble's performance was gloriously, tragically, profoundly Shakespearian. His first scene where we meet him on his throne was magnificent.

Barley

While i agree with many of the flaws that have been pointed out, i do have to admit that i am glad somebody made the films. Aside from the obvious problems, i tend to take the (really)good along with the (really)bad, and give them the benefit of the doubt. After all, capturing Middle Earth on film 100% accurately would be an insurmountable task. Granted, that doesn't let anybody off the hook for things like replacing Glorfindel, killing off Haldir, and giving Denethor the table manners of swine But all things considered, i have to admit that i'm glad my friends dragged me (kicking/screaming/by the hair, at first, lol, because i didn't want to see LOTR being completely butchered by 'Hollywood') to see the first film when it came out in the theaters. It could have been a lot worse. In many ways i was actually pleasantly surprised.

Now if anyone attempted to make a film about the Second Age and messed it up, then you'd really see my cat-claws come out And then i would just go away and cry for years...

Lotr on tv

PJ's movie trilogy of LOTR will be broadcast this Friday/Saturday/Sunday on TBS in high definition. Check your local listings.

Barley

Barley! Hey, where have you been? lol


And yes, very Shakespearian. I think my favorite scene with Denethor was this:

Denethor: You think you are wise, Mithrandir. Yet for all your subtleties, you have not wisdom. Do you think the eyes of the White Tower are blind? I have seen more than you know. With your left hand you would use me as a shield against Mordor, and with your right you would seek to supplant me. I know who rides with Theoden of Rohan. Oh, yes. Word has reached my ears of this Aragorn, son of Arathorn, and I tell you now, I will not bow to this Ranger from the North, last of a ragged house long bereft of lordship!

It was like, there could not have been better tone inflections, or evil eye looks, or crazy thoughts...I love to see an actor make me feel what the character is feeling, and I think (book and movie difference aside) that John Nobel was amazing.


@ Voronwen,

I had the fortunate luck (and yes, I am glad of this) that I did not discover Tolkien until PJ's movies. I think that if I had spend years reading the books and then seen the movies, I would have, like many of you, flipped out. But because PJ opened my mind to the works of Tolkien, I cannot help but feel gratitude, though I do (I am, ) kicking and screaming about things done wrong, books to movies.