The Army of the Dead- Movie vs Books

[1stvermont]

So i read a great essay on the army of the dead found here.


Answerer: can the Dead Men (Army of the Dead) kill people?
https://terpconnect.umd.edu/~jkeener/tolkien/deadmen.html

"There has been considerable pushback from book fans to the depiction of the Dead Men as an essentially invincible force. To be clear, there is nothing in the books to suggest that the Dead had the ability to slaughter tens of thousands of soldiers in a matter of minutes. "

So what are everyone thoughts, did the movies portray the army of the dead in a lore accurate manner [ them fighting at the battle of the pelennor fields?] or did they overpower them for movie effects.

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

So i read a great essay on the army of the dead found here.


Answerer: can the Dead Men (Army of the Dead) kill people?
https://terpconnect.umd.edu/~jkeener/tolkien/deadmen.html

"There has been considerable pushback from book fans to the depiction of the Dead Men as an essentially invincible force. To be clear, there is nothing in the books to suggest that the Dead had the ability to slaughter tens of thousands of soldiers in a matter of minutes. "

So what are everyone thoughts, did the movies portray the army of the dead in a lore accurate manner [besides them fighting at the battle of the pelennor fields] or did they overpower them for movie effects.

Quite simply, they were to me a Deus Ex Machina...or, rather...

A Dead Ex Machina.

CL

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Thanks for the link, 1stvermont, I'd not read that essay by Tolkien, though I was surprised by the "broken legs" comment -- unless I missed it, there's no hint of it in LOTR. The impression I got was that Baldor had found himself lost in the darkness, and died of thirst, or possibly fright.

As for the film, I have to wonder if this thread should go in the "Dead Horse" or "Can of Worms" file! We shall see.

One of the problems with Jackson's approach is that he wants to make everything more "action-packed" and "exciting", a flaw forseen by Tolkien, in his comments on the proposed 1950's film. The result often has the opposite effect -- case in point, the desperate fighting in the Pelennor Fields being reduced to a feeling of anticlimax, as the "green blob" engulfs the enemy.

But the whole episode of the Deadmen reveals, I think, a fundamental misunderstanding of literary conventions, of the same kind that led him to dismiss Faramir's character as too "one-dimensional". Or as my brother wryly put it at the time, "in other words, Tolkien didn't know what he was talking about".

As the mode of Aragorn's thread of the saga modulates from romance to high-mimetic, his role changes from that of companion and helper of the Hero of the Quest, to that of King-to-Be. The turn is signalled by Gandalf's handing over of the Palantir, and Aragorn's use of it: "I am the lawful master of the Stone, and I had both the right and the strength to use it". And it is accompanied by the introduction of other symbols of royalty: his heretofore unmentioned horse, the sign of aristocratic "chivalry" (note Theoden's use of the term "knights"), and the transformation of the wizard's staff, romance's version of the apocalyptic Tree of Life, into the staff of the Banner of the Tree of Gondor.

The first major action of the change in mode is the Deadmen episode. There is no "thrilling" danger of attack from the "King of the Dead", no bargaining, no "Whattaya say?" -- rather, Aragorn commands them, by right as the true king: "I summon you to to the Stone of Erech!". Indeed, in that sense, he "is" the King of the Dead, as the rumour among the people of the land has it.

All of this is missed in the movie version.

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

Thanks for the link, 1stvermont, I'd not read that essay by Tolkien, though I was surprised by the "broken legs" comment -- unless I missed it, there's no hint of it in LOTR. The impression I got was that Baldor had found himself lost in the darkness, and died of thirst, or possibly fright.

As for the film, I have to wonder if this thread should go in the "Dead Horse" or "Can of Worms" file! We shall see.

One of the problems with Jackson's approach is that he wants to make everything more "action-packed" and "exciting", a flaw forseen by Tolkien, in his comments on the proposed 1950's film. The result often has the opposite effect -- case in point, the desperate fighting in the Pelennor Fields being reduced to a feeling of anticlimax, as the "green blob" engulfs the enemy.

But the whole episode of the Deadmen reveals, I think, a fundamental misunderstanding of literary conventions, of the same kind that lead him to dismiss Faramir's character as too "one-dimensional". Or as my brother wryly put it at the time, "in other words, Tolkien didn't know what he was talking about".

As the mode of Aragorn's thread of the saga modulates from romance to high-mimetic, his role changes from that of companion and helper of the Hero of the Quest, to that of King-to-Be. The turn is signalled by Gandalf's handing over of the Palantir, and Aragorn's use of it: "I am the lawful master of the Stone, and I had both the right and the strength to use it". And it is accompanied by the introduction of other symbols of royalty: his heretofore unmentioned horse, the sign of aristocratic "chivalry" (note Theoden's use of the term "knights"), and the transformation of the wizard's staff, romance's version of the apocalyptic Tree of Life, into the staff of the Banner of the Tree of Gondor.

The first major action of the change is the Deadmen episode. There is no "thrilling" danger of attack from the "King of the Dead", no bargaining, no "Whattaya say?" -- rather, Aragorn commands them, by right as the true king: "I summon you to to the Stone of Erech!". Indeed, in that sense, he "is" the King of the Dead, as the rumour among the people of the land has it.

All of this is missed in the movie version.

Wonderful explanation!

CL

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Thanks -- assuming you're not being sarcastic!

I do tend to run on. . .

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

assuming you're not being sarcastic

Not at all - It was sincerely meant.

CL

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Oh,OK, in that case, thanks again.

I was just being sarcastic!
I mean, just look at me!

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

I was just being sarcastic!

CL

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

BTW-- RE my very first comment, 1stvermont, I see that all of us on this thread are fairly new here-- "second generation", you might say. If you go back and read some of the threads from when the movies came out, you'll find there were some real flame wars going on. Most of the people involved have apparently moved on to other things, even some of the moderators. Nothing unusual in that on forums, of course, but you can see where my comment came from. Maybe the upcoming TV series will bring some of them back (not the flamers though, I hope!).

I have no particular interest in discussing the movies, unless it helps in understanding the books -- which is one reason I stayed away from Tolkien forums for so long. A lot of what passed for "discussion" in those days seemed to consist of arguments over which actor was the "hottest", and suchlike.

Which reminds me: is there a search function on this forum? If so, I haven't found it. I've so far been using Google to look for subjects here.

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

Which reminds me: is there a search function on this forum?

I don't believe there is. I haven't found one either.


CL

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Hmm. Oh well, Google it is, then.

I'm contemplating posting a stick-my-neck-out idea on dragons, so have been browsing some old threads. A few interesting discussions, but I haven't found anything precisely germane yet.

I'll keep looking.

Another question: do you know of other forums that are showing at least a glimmer of life? It seems to be Zombie World out there!

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

Another question: do you know of other forums that are showing at least a glimmer of life? It seems to be Zombie World out there!

Can't say that I do.

I believe that once the Amazon Tolkien show gets really underway we may see this forum hopping, at least to a degree.

CL

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Yeah, I think you're right there. As Bilbo said, "We shall see".

Of course, that was in answer to Gandalf's question, "Who will laugh, I wonder?"

Oh, another BTW, 1stvermont -- have you read through this?

http://thetolkien.forum/index.php?threads/peter-jackson-ruined-the-battle-of-pelennor-fields.19639/

 

[1stvermont]

Yeah, I think you're right there. As Bilbo said, "We shall see".

Of course, that was in answer to Gandalf's question, "Who will laugh, I wonder?"

Oh, another BTW, 1stvermont -- have you read through this?

http://thetolkien.forum/index.php?threads/peter-jackson-ruined-the-battle-of-pelennor-fields.19639/

Thanks for the link i actually saw that pop up yesterday and read the op and the first few posts.

 

[Starbrow]

is there a search function on this forum

?
There's a Search Forum tab at the top of the page under the logo.

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Aha! The little dot! A true Easter Egg.

Thanks very much!

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

?
There's a Search Forum tab at the top of the page under the logo.

Well, I'm daft...


CL

 

[Squint-eyed Southerner]

Yup. Hidden in plain sight.

In my defense, I haven't received my Secret Decoder Ring yet.

 

[CirdanLinweilin]

I haven't received my Secret Decoder Ring yet

Neither have I.


CL