Scouring of the Shire won't be in the movies

What I really like is that guy standing in the background behind Pippin...he looks like "Grishnak of Borg" or something...

I think the books ending is very powerful. Just a simple "I'm back." It says so much. In terms of affecting the reader it's like the final sigh after all has been said and done.

On the other hand, it could be just as fine having it end with Sam, Merry and Pippin sitting listening to the waves. One ending I have heard suggested (and one I certainly disagree with) is having it end with Arwen and Aragorns story finished. That is, Aragorn dying and Arwen going to old Lorien to pass away. Other then being an extremely bitter ending, it also wouldn't quite fit in my opinion.

I have to say I'm dissapointed that the SOS is being left out, as I believe this does yank the heart away from the story - the fact that the effects of war do not end when the last shot is fired. While it does seem that the SOS would be un-cinematic, I think that a shortened version of the SOS would not have taken that much away from the ending. Considering the films are a 9 hour epic, it need not have an ending that is only two minutes long. If the whole thing could be done in ten minutes, then I really don't think the ROTK would suffer as a film. However, without it, the story suffers.

I did support PJ's changes to FOTR, and if there are some changes in the battles then fair enough, but I really don't see why an integeral part of the story need be cast aside.

The Scouring of the Shire

I have read on many threads on this website that there is rumor that there will be no scouring of the shire at the end of the Return of the King movie. However, to me this seems contradictory with what was presented in the Fellowship of the Ring. You see, in the movie, when Frodo looks into the mirror of Galadriel, he sees the shire being burned and overthrown and so on. Why would Jackson bother to put this vision into the Fellowship if he did not intend to include the Scouring in the final movie?? If anyone has any insight on this it would be greatly appreciated!

I've heard that the mirror scene was the way that PJ paid tribute to the scouring. He isn't going to have more of it at the end of the trilogy. That was the last of it.

First of all, keep in mind that with the way PJ is making these movies anything is possible. Yes, even Tom Bombadil (don't make me pull out the quote where PJ says that he'd like to go back after the trilogy is done and shoot another half hour or so of extra footage, including Bombadil). Having said that, at the mirror (in the movie) Galadriel says "That is what shall come to pass should you fail." Since Frodo doesn't fail, it doesn't come to pass.

Of course, I'm still hoping PJ changes his mind about this change and goes in to do some extra shooting. But then again that would contradict what Galadriel said, so I suppose PJ has put himself in a situation where he can't add it in later. Too bad, if you ask me.

Thank you very much for the insight. I hadn't thought of it that way. But I suppose its better that he included it in the mirror scene than not including it at all. If I were the director I wouldn't have cut it at all. But alas, I am not, and must suffer through changes and/or cuts!

A thought

Here's a thought:

In the books it is Sam, not Frodo who sees what is happening in the Shire while looking through the mirror. Also, what he sees is not hobbits in chains, buildings burning, or orcs. Instead he sees trees being chopped down, Bagshot Row dug up, and a red-brick building. If you remember, in the books the hobbits of the shire are not imprisoned or tortured (except for those in the Lockholes) in any way as what Frodo's vision in the mirror of Galadriel in the movies portrayed. What Frodo saw is what would happen should he fail - Sauron would eventually destroy the Shire. What Sam saw is what happened. Perhaps PJ was just trying to raise the emotions of his audiences to make them realize that the quest must not fail. Since what Frodo sees doesn't come to pass I don't think that it is a reference to the scouring of the Shire - especially since he didn't really see anything which is quite accurate to what happens in the Shire - unless PJ really messes the whole thing up or if there is no scouring. Grrr... Anyway, what I'm saying is that maybe it wasn't a reference to the scouring at all? Maybe PJ is going to save the scouring as a surprise. Personally, I will be pretty sad if there is no scouring. Frodo has to go home and go to the Gray Havens, and if he goes home I think that the scouring is essential to the plot - especially with Saruman. No wishing to punch his pimply faces and thinking you Shiriffs look a lot of tom fools? That would be awfull!

That's funny, cuz when I said things like that about Frodo standing up to the Nazgul alone at the Ford I was labeled a Rabid Purist Nutcase...and nobody has yet shown me one good reason why from a cinematic standpoint the scene needed to be shot the way that it is, yet it is all too clear why the Scouring being included in the end of The Return of the King would be a cinematic Faux Pas...I think I'm beginning to understand how this works now, I've been mistaken in attempting to argue using logic instead of personal gut feelings about the works and so have been "wrong" all this time...

First of all, personally I also wish PJ had kept Frodo defying the Nazgul. But, and I think this is important, the point where you become a "Rabid Purist Nutcase" is when, based on that sole change, you shun the movie as a whole. I'm not saying you've done this, but that is where logic comes into play. Also, I think there is a major difference between Frodo defying the Nazgul and the Scouring of the Shire. Leaving out the former is only ommiting one detail from a much larger scene. Cutting the latter is not only butchering one of the most memorable chapters in the book, but perhaps one of the most meaningful ones. As much as I liked the Old Forest and Bombadil, they really didn't do much for the story. The Scouring is an important part of the story, and in many ways the whole ending of the tale is altered by cutting it.

As you no doubt know, I am all for supporting PJ's vision to make these movies as cinematic as possible. At the same time, I've admitted that he's had to walk a fine line between being faithful to the book and still keeping the movie good. I think cutting the Scouring is way too liberal. Plus, at least personally I can see it as being very cinematic at the same time. PJ as already shown us that he can end a movie without a classic "happy ending". I'm sure he'd be able to do it in RotK as well, if he chose to.

Nenya, read this:

http://thetolkien.forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2936

It includes the following:

Originally posted by PRH
"The scouring of the shire is out. PJ said it simply was not practical to retain it, as the story arc is rooted in Frodo's quest to destroy the ring. He said that while understanding the reasons -- personal and literal -- that the passage was important to Tolkien, that it adds an unnecessary coda to the story that he had always, even as a reader, found "awkward." He said that the scenes in Galadriel's mirror were his way of paying "homage" to the material, as showing the possible results if the quest should fail. He gave no indication of how he was going to get around this in the final movie, but we should probably start speculating now, as it seems certain."

Click to expand...

How depressing!

Thanks PRH! I can see that I'm behind in TTT news. I had no idea about all that. I call it very depressing. I absolutely adore PJ's first movie, but with all the things he seems to be changing I'm not sure what I'll think of the next one. Thanks for the info!

No problem, and sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings.

Here is a link to a picture I found of the only remnant of "The Scouring" that was shot for the film, bits of which were used when Sam gazed into the Mirror...

http://www.readwryt.com/scouring01.jpg

Enjoy it while you can, it's all of the scouring you will get.

Thanks for the link to the pic. Bummer - it's such an important chapter too. I'm posting my opinion on the other "Scouring of the Shire" thread.

Just had to jump in and give my piece after just finding out yesterday that PJ was going to cut out the Scouring. Just like Talimon I think that "The Scouring is an important part of the story, and in many ways the whole ending of the tale is altered by cutting it." It shows that evil can get in anywhere, anytime. I just can't see the hobbits returning home to a Shire not touched in any way by the War. Like someone mentioned (I can't remember who), The Shire is always this little safe spot in Frodo's heart, and I feel that the sadness of the torn up Shire is only part of what Frodo and the hobbits have to deal with when they get home. Life couldn't be just a piece of cake after Sauron was destroyed. It just doesn't make sense for the hobbits to go home to a happy, prosperous Shire. I think the the Scouring is necessary to convey how much Sauron touched Middle Earth. I just can't picture a place as comfortable as The Shire staying completely untouched by evil while the rest of ME was in turmoil. Not to mention the fact that the hobbits think that they are going to find the Shire just like it was, but then realize that evil cannot be destroyed by one incident. Sauron touched ME, and his touch would remain long after he was destroyed. Such is the way of evil.

As for the Cinematical element, I think a bitter-sweet ending would be perfect. I can't see the movie ending completely happy. So much sacrifice was involved by Frodo and sacrifice loses it's potency if there is nothing to sacrifice. If everything is just great in the Shire and Frodo goes home and lives happily ever after, where is his sacrifice? Of course this also has to do with Frodo's unrest in the Shire, the scars that the Ring left with him, his going to the Gray havens, etc. Yes, a bitter-sweet ending would be perfect especially since so much of the movie is bitter-sweet. A big happy schabang at the end wouldn't fit.

By the way, does anyone know if they are or aren't going to have the departures to The Gray Havens?

By the way, does anyone know if they are or aren't going to have the departures to The Gray Havens?

Click to expand...

In an interview with Elijah Wood done by Empire magazine, I think, there was question asking how it felt to film the final scene at the Grey Havens. I am pretty sure the actual words "Grey Havens" were used, and EW answered the question straight without saying anything about there being a change. On the other hand Ian Holms, the guy who did Bilbo, said his last scene in the movie has him riding with Frodo into the sunset. From what I remember the way he said that was very loose, meaning the ending might still be the same as the book. We'll have to see.

One thing worth noting is the fact that PJ said that the last scene in the book is his favorite, emotionally. I remember the interview, and he said some very insightful stuff about how it embodies the ideas of sacrifice and giving. So I don't think the ending will be completely butchered, if butchered at all. That is, beyond cutting the Scouring.

One thing worth noting is the fact that PJ said that the last scene in the book is his favorite, emotionally. I remember the interview, and he said some very insightful stuff about how it embodies the ideas of sacrifice and giving. So I don't think the ending will be completely butchered, if butchered at all. That is, beyond cutting the Scouring.

Click to expand...

Well, there are some pretty emotional scenes in TFOR, and so maybe, since those scenes were so great, PJ's favorite emotional scene will do the ending justice (I'll just have to put up with no Scouring as much I hate the idea ). I guess we'll see. Also, that does sound hopeful about the Gray Havens. Perhaps it will be a great ending after all. I certainly hope so - I do think that PJ did a great job with the first movie or else I wouldn't think about it all the time. I just want the next two movies to be as good as the first one!

Originally posted by Talimon
he said some very insightful stuff about how it embodies the ideas of sacrifice and giving.

Click to expand...

Frodo: I sacrificed myself to save the Shire. Now excuse me while I sail off to paradise.

Isn't it interesting that when the "Purist Nutcases" were complaining about the things that Jackson cut like Frodo standing up to the Nazgul (showing his new found resolve and strength), the Blindfolding of the Fellowship by the Elves of Lothlorien (Showing the solidarity of the Fellowship) as well as other omitted items they were just not seeing how these changes were necessary for the cinematic medium, but when it is pointed out that Jackson decided not to completely destroy the Introduction=>Development of Conflict=> Resolution of Conflict structure that nearly every movie, and DEFINATELY every Adventure Movie has had, and which audiences have come to expect...the same people who decried the complaints of the purists suddenly have a problem with one of the truely rational omissions the Director is making?