NEW BOOKS OUT: major spoilers!!!

[northsuperior]

went to the local chapters this weekend and what did i see but TTT official movie guides and the making of TTT. leafed through them and wheeeeew major spolers galore.

OK DONT READ THIS IF YOU DONT WANT TO GET THE SPOLERS DUHHHHHH:
HER GOES ,


1. Aragorn intertcepts some wargs whilst escorting refugees ,and gets killed!!!! well thats what Gimli thinks and he tells this to Eowyn . who of course is horrified.
but......... hes only wounded and rescued by Brego, Theodreds horse whom he has befriended in a previous scene, who has been maddened by battle and his masters loss. Remember those scenes at TORN with Aragorn on the ground in front of a horse kneeling to pick him up??? they were late shots done a few months ago.

Aragorn then returns later with reports of Saruman army approaching helms deep. thats the shot of Aragorn opening the doors of the hall,( at helms deep it seems) you know the one where he looks like the doors are ten tons heavy and he overdramatising it, well he wounded , the teaser then shows, Theoden armoured and sitting but quickly swinging his head around with his advisor hama with him.
They cant belive hes alive i guess.
2. theoden himself casts wormtongue out of the golden hall and chases him with his sword.

3, Pippin and Merry escape the uruk hai when the riders attack, BUT they are chased by grishnack ( or however you spell his name) and guess who rescues them??????if you really have to guess.... you're way off track.
4 wormtongue and saruman discuss there plans whilst over a big pot " the fire of the orthanc", a kettle like thing thats shown later in the battle and during one part of the teaser. Itsd used to bring down the wall of the deep.

5 Eowyn protects the refugees in helms deep who have armed themselves to make a last stand if the outer walls fall, even kids are wearing armour.

6 Elrond goes to lorien to seek the counsel of galadriel, to see what they can do for the world of men. at first it seems they are willing to do knothing as any force they send would be a trifle and its best not to waste elf lives.
then they realize that they must turn Saurons eye away from the ring and on isenguard and Rohan, so the ring bearer has a chance to get to Mordor.
so thats why they send the elves to Helms deep.

7 Eomer is not at helms deep, he leads a charge of riders with Gandalf that forces the Uruk Hai back and into the new forest behind and won the dike , that subsequently swallows them up.( this is explained on a big pull out diagram showing helms deep the deeping comb the forest and the ridge where eomer attacks.


thats all i know i didnt buy the books, i think i will, but i stood there for an hour reading them until enough people i knew wondered what the heck i wuz doing, and i beat a path outta there

Northsuperior out!!!

[Coney]

I really hope this is a joke:(

[Aeryn]

Amen Coney.


If this is true, I will walk out.

[Coney]

If this is true I'll...........well I can't say what I'll do in this forum but it will certainly involve bodily fluids and disgruntled noises:mad:

[bropous]

Okay.

If these variations from the story are true, oh well. What can we do? We can't get Jackson to change his film, we would look pretty stupid standing outside theaters in the snow with signs reading "Jackson Veered From The Original Story Line: Pick Up The Books," and simply boycotting the film would be a big pain because we would miss some really prime-time Tolkien-inspired (because that, sadly, is all that it is) entertainment.

All we can do is appreciate the effort Jackson put forth, knowing that he has set a rather high bar for the NEXT director to come along and actually make the film directly from the books. The three films will be visual delights, and will echo the story with great frequency, and if we can set aside our upset at Jackson's uppity poetic license, we might actually come away saying the films aren't all that bad after all and can focus once again on our own inner portrait we paint using the pallette of Tolkien's words.

[crickhollow]

Originally posted by bropous
Okay.

If these variations from the story are true, oh well. What can we do? We can't get Jackson to change his film, we would look pretty stupid standing outside theaters in the snow with signs reading "Jackson Veered From The Original Story Line: Pick Up The Books," and simply boycotting the film would be a big pain because we would miss some really prime-time Tolkien-inspired (because that, sadly, is all that it is) entertainment.

All we can do is appreciate the effort Jackson put forth, knowing that he has set a rather high bar for the NEXT director to come along and actually make the film directly from the books. The three films will be visual delights, and will echo the story with great frequency, and if we can set aside our upset at Jackson's uppity poetic license, we might actually come away saying the films aren't all that bad after all and can focus once again on our own inner portrait we paint using the pallette of Tolkien's words. That's tremendous advice, bropous. However, it's so much fun to be shushed in the theater by a group of forty friends when I stand up and yell, "that's not how it's supposed to happen!" that I think I'll do that once and get it out of my system, and then go and see the movie and enjoy it as a terrific, Tolkien-inspired film.

[Entlover]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by northsuperior
[B] Pippin and Merry escape the uruk hai when the riders attack, BUT they are chased by grishnack ( or however you spell his name) and guess who rescues them??????if you really have to guess.... you're way off track.
__________________________________________________---

I got it -- it's Arwen! Of course.

Jackson already said TT will be less like the books than either of the other two -- with extrapolations and invented scenes. But y'know, Tolkien himself said he hoped people would take his books as a starting point for new adventures. I suppose these could fall into that category.

[crickhollow]

Arwen doesn't seem plausible. Treebeard would be the obvious answer, but I'm sensing that this is a trick question. I'll vote for Gandalf, as (in the book anyway) he was wandering around fangorn already.

so what's the answer, northsuperior?

[Millane]

everyone seems to give PJ a hard time about the movies... the first one was awesome ... it isnt the end of the world for me if the movies arnt like the book i definately wont be walking out on it...
Jackson said that these next movies are not going to be as true to the books but they are supposed to be a lot better than the FOTR and it might just be me but i reckon they were awesome... i have said it before but the movies arnt just for fans of the book, or even for those people that have read the book... My little twin brothers havnt read the book but they absolutely love it...

[Dunadan]

It actually sounds pretty close to the story. It would seem obvious to make more of the pillaging of Rohan prior to Helm's Deep to build up to that battle. Sounds like they've swapped Eomer for Erkenbrand, and changed the movement of characters, but not much else. And all Eowyn fans get to see her strut her stuff before ROTK.

The major change seems to be the introduction of elves into the southern battles. Presumably this is to keep up the love interest, show that they're doing something other than heading for the havens, and make more of the Anduril/Narsil and Estel things.

For me, a big success of the first film was how they put across the sense of loss of the elves. Galadriel is the one who ties it all together. So they have to get her and them into TTT, or else it'll look totally disjointed to the non book-literate audience. It will also help to make clear to them that there is a strategy in drawing Sauron out, which helps Frodo.

On balance, this is OK. We get the Riders of Rohan scene, Uruk-hai, Treebeard, Gandalf-as-Saruman, Helm's Deep and oliphaunts. I can live with that.

cheers

d.

[viggosbeard]

I think we all knew there were going to be changes, and as long as they stay within the " feel " of the books, then im not going to winge.If pj had followed the books to the letter people would still have had a go about something - lets face it Gandalfs eyebrows are way too short ! I think Bropous hit it pretty square, Tolkien inspired entertainment, lets face it, nobody can make the film that we all have in our heads and hearts, but pj is making a pretty good fist of it !

[bropous]

Well, if Arwen DOES end up saving Merry and Pippin from Grishnakh, I will be completely incapable of not blurting, "bullSH*T!!!!!!!!" when her slightly mongoloidish features stain the screen.

I may ACCEPT the changes, but by golly, I ain't gotta LIKE 'em! LOL!

Who cares. THIS will not be the "definitive" visualization of Tolkien's works. THE definitive visual version will be a "virtual-reality movie" produced in the first half of the twenty-third century.

[Dunadan]

Originally posted by bropous
Who cares. THIS will not be the "definitive" visualization of Tolkien's works. THE definitive visual version will be a "virtual-reality movie" produced in the first half of the twenty-third century.
OK, that's it. I'm going down the shops and getting cryogenically frozen first thing tomorrow morning.

[viggosbeard]

you do realise that if i get frozen and brought round in the year whatever to star in the lord of the rings virtual reality movie, Aragorn will be a little fat skinhead ! scary thought.

[Firekitten2006]

If it flows well i wont be angry. but if its as bad as it sounds I will walk out. i couldnt even read all of those spoilers

[Shadowfax]

Right now, this is all I can say: GGGGGGGGGGGGGRRRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG GGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!:eek: :eek: :mad: :( :eek: :eek:

[viggosbeard]

i watched the extended dvd last night and there is a peice in it called something like from the text to the screen , pj and a couple of people cover this topic and give their reasons - worth a watch,
pretty valid if you believe they know what they are doing.

I wonder how many people will walk out?????!!!

[BeardofPants]

I'll probably be the only New Zealander to walk out. ;)

[viggosbeard]

are you going to give it the old dramatic " i cannot be part of this travesty anymore ! " and flounce out, or more of a dignified, head held high ,moral high ground exit ?

could you be excommunicated in new Zealand for walking out ?

[viggosbeard]

ive just seen who rescues merry and pippin - not as bad as i was thinking !

[northsuperior]

well you took that quite well folks, i was quite suprised myself .....at the info in the books and that they would vene release them so soon, and the changes and your reactions.........but i was really suprised that people think that arwen would rescue Piipin and Merry ...well thats really out in space!!
either people have got a hate on for Liv like theirs no tommorrow or they havent read the book at that thouroughly!!
Mano....people if you guess THAT .... well, lets just say that if she did show up in that context ,while i would not waste my money and walk out i would be pretty upset myself .....but i am not.
I havent any info yet!!! but methinks she will show up at the end before that paths of the dead , with Anduril , which you all know is at helms deep and not a second locale such as dunharrow sighhh yes more places cut so we dont confuse all those newbie tolkienites .

i was perturbed enough by the aragorn stuff, and these wargs, well hmmm great for the "sci fi lets make monsters " crowd, but in the book they arent really mentioned that much, but alas maybe PJ wanted to show these creatures as they have turned up before hmmm but was it wargs in the forest in the hobbit or were they referred to as wolves??
anywho back to chapters today for a java and opf course to look at the "sacred tomes" agin folks who knows waht i will see ......and if you are upset at the spolers well dont read im ..... you werent upset were you.........????

[bropous]

".........but i was really suprised that people think that arwen would rescue Piipin and Merry ...well thats really out in space!!
either people have got a hate on for Liv like theirs no tommorrow or they havent read the book at that thouroughly!!"

Excuse me, but I HAVE read the books rather thoroughly, AND have watched the fim rather thoroughly. The reason folks thought it would be Arwen rescuing Merry and Pippin is because Jackson has taken excessive liberties with the story line, NOT because we folks have not read the story thoroughly.

As for the Wargs, well, there might actually be an indication that YOU may not have read the story too thoroughly. Remember that night in Hollin? The attack of the Wargs? Hmmmmm?

I'm not upset by the spoilers, quite the opposite. However, again, Jackson makes unnecessary changes, and THAT is what sets non-newbie Tolkienites off.

Frankly, I think Jackson could have had a little greater respect for hte intelligence of audiences.

[Beleg Strongbow]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
I'll probably be the only New Zealander to walk out. ;)

you live in NZ? :eek:

close to the set?

[Entlover]

Originally posted by Entlover
I got it -- it's Arwen! Of course. [/B]

JOKE!!

That's the last time I try to be funny.;)

[Dunadan]

Well, I thought it was funny

[Nazgul King Squirrel]

I’ve heard PJ is going to improve the names of the films, all very original too:

TFotR will become “Arwen and the Riders of the Lost Ring”

TTT will become “Arwen ‘s Last Crusade”

TrotK will became “Arwen and the Mountain of Doom” (it seems that once again PJ will improve the original and we will see Arwen, the Warrior Princess, going into Mordor, rescuing Frodo and Sam on the final scene, not from Gollum but from the Dark Lord himself, literally kicking him into the abyss.

And if you think I’m joking just ask yourself, he wouldn’t do it, would he? :rolleyes: ;)

[Aeryn]

If anyone has watched the extended movie with commentary with the cast, Liv Tyler says something about being in the next movie. We all know she SHOULDNT but the bloody fact is she is.

The real question is, what does she think she'll be doing?

[Cirdan]

This is getting out of hand. I will tkae Bropous' advice but my enthusiasm for the movies is waning daily. When I thought about getting the extended version of FoTR I saw that it was bundled and cost over a dollar a minute to see stuff that is already in the book, well that was it. I was hoping to rent it but who is going to buy the set to rent out the "Director's Cut" of a movie that was released two months ago on DVD. The greed is unbelivable.

As for the spoilers, how can there be spoilers if you have read the but? I guess the PJ original material does constitute a spoiling of a sort.

Maybe this should have been posted on the Venting thread...

[Elfhelm]

A movie is not a book. It's amazing that people have to be told that still. It is one artist's visualization. When you read, you are supposed to make your own visualization. Look, every time you ask who Tom Baombadil was, you are making your own visualization. Every time you imagine the cow jumped over the moon song and hear a melody, you are making your own visualization. Alan Lee's visualizations are the few I've seen that closely adhere to the books, but just about every other artist has included their own personal imaginary elements when they have rendered it. Especially the Brothers Hildebrandt. Even JRRT changes the stories from the Cottage to the Silmarillion, and close examination might reveal discrepancies in the Luthien/Beren story between the way Strider tells it and the final version.

I will not mind one bit if Treebeard makes his entrance in a more dramatic way. And I know that Galadriel is supposed to be distracting Sauron by trying to clean the Orcs out of Southern Mirkwood, but I don't mind if a movie director needs to make the fact that the elves WERE part of the War of the Ring obvious by bringing them to Helm's Deep instead.

All five of you purists are welcome to your opinions, but please remember that the rest of us PAID to see a movie, not to bask in the brilliance of your ego while you chastise a person who is not even there in the theatre. Tolkien stated quite clearly that he did not believe drama, as a literary form, was capable of transmitting the fairy tale. If you wish to be that pure, never see any movie rendition of any fairy tale or myth or legend. I have news for you: Robin Hood does not send the Sheriff of Nottingham home strapped to the underside of a horse, but it makes for great film. And Arthur never sang "Here in Camelot". Just thought I'd clue you in, there...

I'll just wander off now singing "Frodo of the Nine Fingers, and the Ring of Doom" because, while JRRT never wrote that song, I happen to consider it modern hobbit lore. :p

[viggosbeard]

Bravo Elfhelm

[Elfhelm]

Cool! Thanks for stroking my ego, vigs. Because you know, I am the ultimate purist. See, I can prove that Tolkien got it all wrong because Gandalf is supposed to be a dwarf!

[bropous]

LOL. Looks like Black Breathalyzer is using a new nick.

Get 'em, BoP!:p

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by bropous
LOL. Looks like Black Breathalyzer is using a new nick.

Get 'em, BoP!:p

Yeah, somebody get that man a thesaurus.:rolleyes:

[Elfhelm]

Ah yes, I had to stop reading Tolkien when I learned that the guy who stole the ring from the dragon was SUPPOSED to give it to his wife. And when I read the Nibelungenlied I had to stop listening to Wagner. And when I found out they changed "Odin" to "God" I even had to stop reading that AND Beowulf. So now I sit alone in my dark cave stroking my "precious" ego knowing that I am better than anyone who would tolerate such obvious bawdlerizations!

[Cirdan]

Sounds like a good place for you...:p

[Sween]

Originally posted by Cirdan
Sounds like a good place for you...:p

now now children play nicely or stright to bed with no supper.

Now the changes that he has made are quite off track from the book....... but you know whos cares the movie is still gonna rock.

i think his changes will make for a good movie, rember lord of the rings as book form is unfiliable it just would be really crap. Jacksons providing the best film he thinks he can the most exciting and the most intresting and probably to a certian extent the one that makes the most sence.

it could be black breathliser mind seems to have the same stupid comments

[Elfhelm]

Yeah, but I just know my little delusional world will be shattered by some accident of fate. So maybe I'll just DEAL WITH IT! :p

Hey, Why would BoP "get" me. She used to agree with me.

[BeardofPants]

*Hurls a thesaurus*

;)

[BeardofPants]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
Hey, Why would BoP "get" me. She used to agree with me.

Well, you see, it all began with this annoying little twerp called Black Breathalizer who rather stupidly started a thread on how Peter Jackson IMPROVED Tolkien, and it all went downhill from there.

For some reason they seem to think that you're BB masquerading under a new nick, but I know better, cos I remember you from ages ago. :p

[Elfhelm]

Oh yeah, I read that thread. (vulgar retching sounds)

[Cirdan]

Originally posted by BeardofPants
For some reason they seem to think that you're BB masquerading under a new nick, but I know better, cos I remember you from ages ago. :p

Well if BoP vouches... *puts away meat cleaver*

I think people don't uderstand that the criticism comes from an iraational passion for the work. When I say my excitement is waning it probably means I've stopped wetting myself (hey, I'm old). My point is the more the film varies from the original the more it become just another movie.

I've been waiting for these movies for 25 years so my expectations have had time to... expand beyond all reason. So please go easy on the purist thing. It leads to a less than enjoyable online experience.

[Nibs]

It bugs me that some people make it sound like if you don't dislike the movies, then you're not a true Tolkien fan... no one outright says that, but it's the impression that I get. I appreciate the movie renditions for what they are - an artistic interpretation.

Funny how the loudest complainers of the scene alterations in FotR wouldn't dare miss the second one... so they can howl some more, I guess.

[Elfhelm]

Actually, I think there's close to an even split in this thread between those who want the filmmaker to have no personal interpretation and those who accept that the subjective is part of every rendition. No movie can ever equal the books. So I take them as they are. But then I've run the old I.C.E. games since Christopher first gave his permission, so I'm probably guilty of a thousand more sins than PJ. :p

Please believe that I mean no harm with the "purist" word. I am sure you mean no harm when you succumb to its temptations. hehehe

p.s. I'll see your 25 years and raise you 5 more ;)

[northsuperior]

"All five of you purists are welcome to your opinions, but please remember that the rest of us PAID to see a movie, not to bask in the brilliance of your ego while you chastise a person who is not even there in the theatre"

"It bugs me that some people make it sound like if you don't dislike the movies, then you're not a true Tolkien fan"


peace!!!!people i am sorry and please take my heartfelt apologies, especailly to bropus!!!......
my statements meant no ill, my pride is wounded just as easy as the rest maybe in a former life i was one of the Noldor of Feanors house they had problems with rash pride ahhh but i digress........back to the point ,unfortunatley, and again my apologies, I have incurred the wrath of a few good people here.
i used to post at the imladris site until that succumbed to the dark , but mainly i lurk, at the many boards, post here now , search the tolkien web rings and the movie sites and occasionally post . Maybe my lack of posting has made me green as a sapling as to proper protocol....

while i may, no I DO consider myself a purist, i can too enjoy the movies and beleive me, saw no harm in anything done or what i may even think will be done to them in the future.
i just cannot stand some posters ill derived comments , not that any were made here!!! ,
My point, there are alot of newbies on these sites and their is alot of new Tolkien mythology being creaed that IS ill derived .....
example:
dialogue at imladirs as to the origins of Elronds sword, that arwen wields, it name "hadhrafang", is movie made , and so is its lineage.
One poster way back when at imladirs stated that THIS sword was that of Idril Celebindals of Gondolon in the frist age and that the maiden sword which i beleive "hadrafang" mean ( i may be wrong ) alluded to that .........
Well being that their are alot fo new readers out there and many who have NEVER read the LOTR in its entirety OR especailly the silmarillion ( and that is a hard read to manY ) the next thing you know people facts like these as gospel..
leading to who was idril why and when and then when they read the book therts no sword or mention of it anfd that leaves them really confused ,

during times like those i draw the line and will seek posthaste to correct these situations. an dclarify what is movie and what is NOT.
Ok so i am a little touchy, belive me i am the last person to be mean, i just a big fan , and trying to help some new bies intot eh woinderful worlf of LOTR , thats all .
there was even a person that took ICE enterprises "adapted" tolkien stories and threw that into the mix at imladris, lets just say there were alot of confused people who didnt know what the hey was going on at all.
Its nice to try and separate the book from the movie, for the sake of newbies , face it the book is hard to read even is you like to read, for those that dont it could be a struggle, the book is the real thing, and in a way so is the movie the "real movie" ( cartoons dont coun t and there many of them so take your paick LOL)but

the book IS THE REAL THING...... its like comparing star trek the original series to the later movies and TV shows. when and if someone asks me what is best, it OR the old shows , there is hands down no contest, it the original, the lineage the spirit is in them much like the book.
who knopw sopmeone posted that in twenty years someone will fully digitally make a LOTR that will follow the book to the nth degree, what will that be like???
interesting and again my apologies


Jeff E of the GWN ( great white north)

[northsuperior]

sorry for the bad spelling you can make fun od LO of me if you want LOL

Jeff

[bropous]

Cheese and crackers, northsuperior, I ain't mad!

Bon mots, mon ami.

[viggosbeard]

Does this mean everyone is friends again ?

[Nibs]

Originally posted by North Superior
i just cannot stand some posters ill derived comments , not that any were made here!!!
Heh. Nice save.

I think bropous had the best example of what would define a 'purist':

Originally posted by bropous
Well, if Arwen DOES end up saving Merry and Pippin from Grishnakh, I will be completely incapable of not blurting, "bullSH*T!!!!!!!!"
Just don't howl about it until the next one comes out.

[Nazgul King Squirrel]

:rolleyes: Now Elfhelm, the movie may be good, but not that good that doesn’t deserve a little criticism. :rolleyes:

If one does think PJ’s rendering of the work is below his expectations, why not say it?

For me the problem is not so much the fact he changed the book, something I expected, but how some of his changes doesn’t work that well, and are pointless.

[Amandil]

I was perusing some sort of LOTR playing card thingys today, and the impression I got was that Arwen shows up in the TT in Aragorn's dreams. I guess he misses her, or something. Maybe Arwen uses her super-elf-swordstress-magic and enters his mind from afar...

Some quotes from above: "I'm not upset by the spoilers, quite the opposite. However, again, Jackson makes unnecessary changes, and THAT is what sets non-newbie Tolkienites off."

And similarly, "If one does think PJ’s rendering of the work is below his expectations, why not say it? For me the problem is not so much the fact he changed the book, something I expected, but how some of his changes doesn’t work that well, and are pointless."

These gentlehobbits put the matter quite rightly (sorry, they're probably not hobbits, but it sounds nice, don't it?). Us "purists" are completely aware that this is a "screen adaptation." The point the purists are making is that it's often a rather bad screen adaptation. Defenders of dear Professor Jackson (whoops, he's no professor) would do well to remember that finessed point.

I'm going to go to the Two Towers movie and try my darndest to enjoy myself. Which will, I'm afraid, involve supressing the urge to scream, weep, and vomit. Oh well. But at least I'll have tricked myself into thinking I had a good time!

Love,

[Nibs]

Originally posted by Nazgul King Squirrel
If one does think PJ’s rendering of the work is below his expectations, why not say it?

For me the problem is not so much the fact he changed the book, something I expected, but how some of his changes doesn’t work that well, and are pointless.
Fine. That I can deal with. But certain folks that gripe and gripe about inevitable alterations from book to film who saw FotR a dozen times, and will insist on griping about similar differences found in TTT and RotK (after seeing them a dozen times as well)... that's just deplorable.

Not as though any one here is guilty of that, mind you...

Wouldn't it be fair to criticize the films once you see them all? I mean, the whole Arwen thing just might work out... *ducks, ready for countless objects to be heaved in this direction*

[Nazgul King Squirrel]

Since we already saw the first movie there is no reason why not to express what we liked, and disliked about it. And why not speculate about the next ones, for that mater? After all, this is a gossip thread about the next movies, so…


It is not your case, but some people that I’ve seen complaining about the Big Bad “Purists “ should ask themselves if they are not becoming “PJ Purists” themselves. Incapable of accepting any criticism to the perfection of the work. ;)

[Nibs]

Originally posted by Nazgul King Squirrel
Since we already saw the first movie there is no reason why not to express what we liked, and disliked about it. And why not speculate about the next ones, for that mater?
Maybe I just hate pessimism and speculation, for that mater... :p

[Nazgul King Squirrel]

Hah! but it only is pessimism if it is not likely, otherwise it is just realism:p

[Nibs]

Originally posted by Nazgul King Squirrel
Hah! but it only is pessimism if it is not likely, otherwise it is just realism:p
Who are you to tell me it's not likely? :D

[Nazgul King Squirrel]

Precisely, it is likely, hence it is not pessimism.:D

[Firekitten2006]

Originally posted by Nibs
Not as though any one here is guilty of that, mind you...
Wouldn't it be fair to criticize the films once you see them all? I mean, the whole Arwen thing just might work out... *ducks, ready for countless objects to be heaved in this direction*

lol I think I agree with you. Actually I didnt think there was anything wrong with Arwen in FOTR. I dunno, I thought it worked fine, and didnt change much.

[Nazgul King Squirrel]

Well, it has been said many times before. It is understandable why PJ wanted to extend the role of Arwen, unfortunately he felt that the way to show a strong woman was to diminish everyone around her. A bad move, in my view.