Return of the King

[Blackboar]

How is this movie going to end???
I can't remember where I heard it but I heard It's not going
back to the Shire With Sam and his Kids and Saruman!

If this is true how is it going to end!!! :confused: :confused: :confused:

I will cry if they cut out that part but cry if they keep it in!!

[Beleg Strongbow]

you're right, there is no Scouring of the Shire.

[Gerbil]

It ends with the scene at the Grey Havens.
That bit stayed in cos it was important, but also cos PJ liked it.
Obviously he didn't like the scouring too much so took it out.

Quite amusing that people gave him so much money to make 'his' vision of LotR really. You'd have thought they'd have put in some sort of unbiased 3rd party to make sure it stayed relatively true.

Some bits needed to change, but too much of the changes and tweaks come down to PJ's fickle choice, which isn't the greatest if you ask me.

Oh, and of course let's not forget it was him and his bird doing the screenplay. How's that for unbiased? ;)

[Sween]

Originally posted by Gerbil
It ends with the scene at the Grey Havens.
That bit stayed in cos it was important, but also cos PJ liked it.
Obviously he didn't like the scouring too much so took it out.


oh dear me gerbil i sometimes wonder if you understand what makes a movie work or not.

Scourging of the shire just would not work in a movie. Have you ever seen that movie cast away the story really ends when hes off the island but no it goes on for another 40 minutes or so and really sucks. There would be no way of making it seem very dangerous.

your comments all reside upon the fct of maiing the film truthfull to the book in truth the book would really really suck as a movie im affraid and PJ vision is not so much taking the book and making an exact copy of it into movie beacuse it would be rubbish but he has managed to make a great movie that is still quite similar yet diffrent.

[Gerbil]

oh dear me gerbil i sometimes wonder if you understand what makes a movie work or not.And of course I could hypothesise that you are blinkered in your love of the movie :p

Scourging of the shire just would not work in a movie. Have you ever seen that movie cast away the story really ends when hes off the island but no it goes on for another 40 minutes or so and really sucks. There would be no way of making it seem very dangerous.So what you are saying is PJ is not up to the job then? Just because one film failed at it doesn't mean it's impossible to do.
your comments all reside upon the fct of maiing the film truthfull to the book in truth the book would really really suck as a movie im affraid and PJ vision is not so much taking the book and making an exact copy of it into movie beacuse it would be rubbish but he has managed to make a great movie that is still quite similar yet diffrent. No they don't, you are using selective memory here. I've repeatedly said that I understand some of the changes PJ has made. I'm just pointing out he changed tons of stuff for no reason at all and often for the worse.
Things like motivations, character 'development', random situations that make no sense. It's all in there, and much is inferior to the book as a tale that needs to be told.

Compress the book, I don't mind.
Re-jig where necessary (eg remove TB), I don't mind.
Change characters and situations completely so they are not true to the source material and simply don't make sense, I mind.

I am glad you are able to enjoy FotR by overlooking its many faults. I wish I could, believe me.

[Sween]

i dont think any person is up to the job of the socorging of the shire as in a movie it just would not work.

i am far from blinkred from my love of the movie i love the movie and in fairness i watched it before i read the books but still i think all the changes made in fellowship made sence. making frodo more suseptable to the evil of the ring, making aragorn not so big headed (because let face anyone that turns round and says i am king and i will rule in a film will come across as arogant) and the involvment of arwen all worked.

some as your point are very valid and open for descussion ut a fact remains that PJ has made a film that is winderfull and made me want to read a book (and that is some achivement) so i think he can be proud of what he has done.

i personally do not like the way he is taking farimir in the next movie

[Foul_Dwimmerlaik]

Quite amusing that people gave him so much money to make 'his' vision of LotR really. You'd have thought they'd have put in some sort of unbiased 3rd party to make sure it stayed relatively true.

Not to pile on, gerbil :) but...I'd say that with the amount of money that his films will and have earned, the people who paid him to make them are quite happy with the results. They don't care how relatively true the story is...they care about the bottom line. Money talks in this business.

[Elf.Freak]

i know what the fans want, they want ROTK to be EXACTLY like the book! :D

[Sween]

hmmmmmm its a tough one beacuse the film would lose a lot of meaning. i mean in a book its nice to polish off all the storys you have time. In a film who wants to sit round for 2 hours or so after the war has ended just to watch a load of people say goodbye to each other.

the scourging would be fun but after you've seen the big battles its hardly the dramatic end which you would hope for.

i think of all the books its the easiest to stay true to but the scourging is one of them thing that just will not transfer from book to film a case in point of why films andbooks are two completally diffrent mediums and i for one love that.

[Varda Oiolosseo]

I found a picture of Sam with Elenor from Return of the King! It's really sweet! :)

[Blackboar]

Where is it? On the net?
Could you give us a link?
ppppppppppp llllllllllllll eeeeeeeeeeeeeeee aaaaaaaaaaaa sssssssssssss eeeeeeeeeeeeee

I love Sam!
Elanor too!:D :D

[Varda Oiolosseo]

I couldn't find it but i have found it somewhere else!
I'll put the link up seeing as u asked so nicely!;)

http://www.quintessentialwebsites.com/lordoftherings/movieshots/Book6_Chapter09.htm#IX


:D

[Blackboar]

ttttttttttttttt hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh aaaaaaaaaaaaaa nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx !!!!!
No, really thanx! That site is really good!! It's thousands of pictures on it from all the movies!!!:D :D :D :D

[Celebréiel]

So now ive heard that their moving Shelob to the third movie (which I thought was a great way of ending TT) and that their totally getting rid of the whole last part with the shire!! o_O I know going from book to movie is hard, but doesnt anyone care about how Tolkien wrote the books. I wont jump to anything, b/c we all have yet too see it, but does anyone else think the previews for two towers look a little....er...yeah.
So is there anyword on how their gonna do entmoot and Treebeards cave? I hope it doesnt suck. Really really hope...
-Celebréiel :confused:

[Dunadan]

A little, er, LUSH AND BEEZER, I presume you meant to say ;) I saw the trailer in the cinema last night for the first time; it totally rocks. Even my wife, who thought the first film was boring, wants to see it now. Ha. Deluxe seats are being reserved.

I don't agree that the Scouring couldn't be done, especially the theme of Frodo/Elves losing the Shire/Middle Earth so that it can be saved for others. It would just be an unusual film, and the script would have to be developed much more, hence risky, and maybe beyond the capabilities of PJ to make a film with subtlety of character.

As it is, I guess this explains why Shelob is moved to ROTK. Someone commented on another thread that ROTK is too thin on action for a film, hence Shelob to beef it up a bit. My guess is that the Pelennor will be the climax, with Frodo shinning up Mt Doom while the Rohirrim ride to the rescue. Paths of the Dead will be used to show Aragorn growing into the role of king.

cheers

d.

[Blackboar]

I'll miss the Shelob!!!
But theres lots of Gollum!!:D

[Millane]

well i think that they will conclude the RotK with Legolas, who has just killed 1000 uruks at helms deep, charging, after making a glorious victory at pelloner fields one-handed, to duel sauron before destroying the ring and being crowned King of Gondor...
just kidding but the way things are going it may very well be the case.

i think that the climax in RotK will be Aragorn reclaiming the throne of Gondor and marrying arwen...

[viggosbeard]

Im getting confused signals from some mooters - do people object to PJ making his movie version of the books and editing and omitting as he see's fit ( being a top daddy in the directing biz he probably knows his stuff by now ) or him making the movie and not copying it page by page. :mad:

[cassiopeia]

Originally posted by viggosbeard
Im getting confused signals from some mooters - do people object to PJ making his movie version of the books and editing and omitting as he see's fit ( being a top daddy in the directing biz he probably knows his stuff by now ) or him making the movie and not copying it page by page. :mad:

I think (correct me if I'm wrong here) that people object to PJ making unreasonable changes. I think most people understand that Tom Bombadil should not have been in the film. But parts like Aragorn's weakness and cheesy dialogue ('Lets go hunt some orc!', "Nobody tosses a dwarf!") are what people object to.

[Beleg Strongbow]

exactly. And Aragorn's accent...

[Millane]

Viggo is soooo perfect aragorn just imagine if they had let stuart townsend play him...
my last post was not an attack on the film coz i think that the lifting of Legolas to a god like figure comes through the advertising i posted after i had just been watching the making of... if was all Legolas no Gimli or Gandalf... honestly when referring to Gandalf, Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas they said Legolas and his companions... but i know that is not the film and i would never say anything bad about PJ, speaking about the making of do you think they will put Sean Astins movie in the TT dvd, that would be awesome.
i am glad it hasnt stuck to the book entirely Harry Potter did that and it made the film crap as...
Just think about helms deep 30 minutes battle mmmmmm all us battle pigs will be very happy.

[Elvellon]

Originally posted by Sween

i am far from blinkred from my love of the movie i love the movie and in fairness i watched it before i read the books but still i think all the changes made in fellowship made sence. making frodo more suseptable to the evil of the ring, making aragorn not so big headed (because let face anyone that turns round and says i am king and i will rule in a film will come across as arogant) and the involvment of arwen all worked.



The alterations made to the fellowship don’t seem to work so well to me. Frankly, I think the characters lost a lot of dept.
Frodo strength is mostly absent from The FotR.
Aragon is portrayed as weak and undecided, and gives an impression of not being very competent. If he would look as arrogant if he sowed himself determined to claim his inheritance, in the FotR movie he simply look unsuitable for the job.
Gandalf looks totally at lost of what is going on, frankly, I liked the book’s wise Gandalf better.
And this is just with the Felloship.

PS. If someone wonders why I’m still picking in this old debate, it is because I’ve only recently seen the movie FotR, so it is quite recent to me. :D

[Blackboar]

I liked LotR!

But what about RotK!!!!

It sounds so different from the book!!!!!!!!!!!

[Lollypopgurl]

I am a bit of a Tolkien purist myself, and I was a bit bothered by the changes in FotR and the rumors with TT and RotK.

But then, I can see why PJ altered most of them, so so far I have yet to hunt him down. ;)

[IronParrot]

Lollypopgurl, as you proclaim yourself a purist, I wonder if the quote in your sig ("Why would you want to tamper with anything Tolkien did?") was placed there out of intentional irony. After all, you're quoting the guy who turned Saruman the White into Aruman the Red.

[Lollypopgurl]

Sorry...

[IronParrot]

(Um, that was a tongue-in-cheek non-sequitur on my part... no apology required) :p

[Sween]

Originally posted by Elvellon
The alterations made to the fellowship don’t seem to work so well to me. Frankly, I think the characters lost a lot of dept.
Frodo strength is mostly absent from The FotR.
Aragon is portrayed as weak and undecided, and gives an impression of not being very competent. If he would look as arrogant if he sowed himself determined to claim his inheritance, in the FotR movie he simply look unsuitable for the job.
Gandalf looks totally at lost of what is going on, frankly, I liked the book’s wise Gandalf better.
And this is just with the Felloship.

PS. If someone wonders why I’m still picking in this old debate, it is because I’ve only recently seen the movie FotR, so it is quite recent to me. :D

i havent been checking this thread so forgive the lateness of my reply. I think jackson is going more down the lines of the ring is very very evil than the book does at least early on if frodo wasnt called the ringbearer in the book you could quite forget hes got it.

Aragorn is protrayed as a man that does not want to fail and does also not believe he has a god given right to rule a far more easy character for people with no prior knoledge of the books to relate to than someone block that turns up one night with a broken sword and proclaims hes gonna be king.

Gandalf in the book is more undecided they dont half mess about in the book in terms of time. In the film he allways moves things along swifty and pretty much in the best direction i love him knowing whats in moria :D

[Firekitten2006]

Originally posted by IronParrot
[b]After all, you're quoting the guy who turned Saruman the White into Aruman the Red.

lol

That reminded me, yesterday after seeing TTT I went to a LOTR/Star Wars/that sort of thing store and found a "Mossbeard Treeman" Action figure doll type thing :)

[azalea]

Let's try to keep this thread in topic (specifically, The Return of the King movie). So far it's only been mentioned once on this page.