who else?

[b.banner]

who else hates theoden in the movie .i mean his character is good but sometimes i get annoyed at him in the movie.i mean the way he talks to aragorn and gimli i mean he is a jerk;)

[zinnite]

I somewhat agree, but then again--he is the king of Rohan. I'd probably be the same way if a few people straggled in out of nowhere spreading tales of doom and gloom and telling me how to run my affairs. I'm personally surprised he's not more of an ***hole (like Denethor).

[b.banner]

i mean gimli is a cool guy theres no reason to mean to him

[Dúnedain]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't Theoden have known Aragorn anyway since he helped Rohan and Gondor under the alias of Thorongil for his early years? Now I know in Gondor he did this service under Ecthelion, Denethor's father. Was Theoden ruling at the time of this or was it Thengel his father?

Either way my point is this, if Theoden was ruling then, then his anger towards Aragorn is weird since many years before he had served him...

[Balrog_of_Morgoth]

Personally, I like Theoden and the way he is played. I think he does a good job of holding his own with Aragorn, who has a tendency to steal scenes. Given the circumstances in the movie scenes, I think he acted correctly, as a king would - the stress of that situation would have been huge.

[IronParrot]

I think this was best described in an interview I saw, probably on the DVD or something:

I don't think Théoden is necessarily being mean to Aragorn. It's just that Aragorn has to learn a lot of the wisdom he needs to fulfill the role of a king, so he picks it up from Théoden. Between the two, you see a sort of exchange of ideas - Aragorn teaches Théoden how to be a warrior, and Théoden teaches Aragorn how to be a king.

[Lizra]

Just coming from a "movie" perspective...I Loved Theoden! I thought he was goldeny blond warm, delicious, wonderfully human, desirable, and sexy. Heh! :D I really don't have a lot of desire to go beyond that thought! "Oh Theoden! Come have a long, slow, glass of red wine with me!" :)

[The Gaffer]

Originally posted by IronParrot
I don't think Théoden is necessarily being mean to Aragorn. It's just that Aragorn has to learn a lot of the wisdom he needs to fulfill the role of a king, so he picks it up from Théoden. Between the two, you see a sort of exchange of ideas - Aragorn teaches Théoden how to be a warrior, and Théoden teaches Aragorn how to be a king.
That's an interesting view; I hadn't thought of that before. Makes a lot of sense.

I thought Bernard Hill did a great job as Theoden, and that the films fleshed out his character from the books. It would've been too easy to render his character as flat and all goody-goody; the film made his redemption more believable.

And anyway, if someone came into my throne room, punched the lights out of everyone nearby, put his feet up on my table and variously belched, farted and sprayed spit all over my nice furnishings, I might be a bit gruff with them.

[eowyngirl14]

well i like Theoden and all, but he was really annoying in the movie. i dunno, just something about the way he acted all the time really bugged me. and he seemed a little stuck up to me.

[b.banner]

most of you guys have a point about him being king of rohan but he still is not very wise for a king. but he is not so bad as denethor.

[Elfhelm]

I think there is a parallel between the pity Gandalf advises Frodo to feel for Gollum and the act of sparing Wormtongue's life. It's that show-don't-tell thing again. In a book it's all very well to say things like "Why didn't he just slit his throat?" and reply "He has a part to play, yet." But on film you have to show Theoden raising his sword to slay Wormtongue and Aragorn physically stopping him. However, the resulting dynamic between the characters requires two things. Aragorn has to accept Theoden glaring at him and kneel to accept his forgiveness for staying his hand. Then later, Theoden has to verbally chastise Aragorn to remind him who is King.

And Wormtongue does have a part to play yet, as surely as does Gollum, so I think PJ is justified in highlighting the parallelism.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

" Aragorn teaches Théoden how to be a warrior, and Théoden teaches Aragorn how to be a king."
__________________________________________________
This is true in the movie. But, curiously, in the book Theoden behaves far more like the life-long warrior-king he was, after Gandalf heals him (much more realistically then in the movie exorcism).
I just hope PJ doesn't mess up one of the best bits in the book (Theoden's speech to the troops and his charge at the Pelennor Fields). That just has to be read aloud like poetry, even if you're by yourself.

Arise, arise, Riders of Theoden!
Fell deeds awake: fire and slaughter!
spear shall be shaken, shield be splintered,
a sword-day, a red day, ere the sun rises!
Ride now, ride now! Ride to Gondor!

"With that he seized a great horn from Guthlaf his banner-bearer, and he blew such a blast upon it that it burst asunder.............
Fey he seemed, or the battle-fury of his fathers ran like new fire in his veins, and he was borne up upon Snowmane like a god of old, even as Orome the Great in the battle of the Valar when the world was young. His golden shield was uncovered, and lo! it shone like an image of the Sun, and the grass flamed into green about the white feet of his steed. For morning came, morning and a wind from the sea; and darkness was removed, and the hosts of Mordor wailed, and terror took them, and they fled, and died, and the hooves of wrath rode over them."

[smaug_the_magnificent]

Perhaps instead it should read "Aragorn *reminds* Theoden how to be a warrior *again*"

Let's not forget that Theoden was a proud & deft soldier erstwhile, in the great tradition of his forbears of Rohan..

In that sense Aragorn was the fulcrum, the fillip of Theoden's fighting spirit and his resistance of despair. Gandalf initiated it of course, but the Wizard's departure thereafter worked to pervade grave doubts within the King once again, to further emphasise the weakness of men's hearts, men's resolve. In the movie at least, only Isildur's heir could smash the cycle of Theoden's weakness completely.. Gandalf's role was not to persuade (especially through deeds) but to counsel, while Aragorn had the gift of chivalry & it was his time to wield this virtue in all its glory

The augmentation of Aragorn's significance is portrayed further, in the scene Elfhelm mentions about the pity shown towards Wormtounge.. Of course in the books Theoden is far more Kingly at this juncture, offering an olive branch to Wormtounge, in spite of his past wrongs.. To me this pity is more noble and more palatable, because after all it his Theoden himself who has lost most at the hands of Wormtounge's subterfuge.. The pity of Theoden towards Grima carries far more profundity because of the level of forgiveness he has to render.. There's a history between the two characters (some would say even love) that makes the final offering of Theoden more *real* - more touching..

In the movie, the comparable scene is naturally more dramatic and therefore perhaps more cinematically satisfactory (I don't know?).. And further more, it is obvious (perhaps too obvious!) what PJ is trying to expound through Aragorn's role at this moment. He is building up *THE* King, aiming to display all of the traits a good King should have as he ascends into his predestined role. The only downside to this kind of (film) philosophy is that it often comes at the expense of other characters! Theoden being a good case in point..
One of those (Kingly) virtues is of course pity and here it is displayed in a very palpable way. It is believable because it is a small window on a good cinematic sequence with all the attributes that go to make up something that *works* on screen - but underneath the surface it doesn't have the kind of emotional reach (& plausibility) that the book does in this instance. There's little cogency for Theoden's capricious and rather violent attack against Grimia, and there's equally less corollary behind Aragorn's subsequent rush to Grima's aid.. Of course there can be arguments made for the aforesaid happening, but that is not the point.. The arguments against them happening are far greater

Still, if consistency means anything than no doubt the way the scene is played out has its merits.. The role of film-Aragorn has continued to grow throughout the trilogy, to the point where we can now anecdotally suggest he is the central character of PJ's films.. The saving of Grima's hide thanks exclusively to the good graces of Aragorn is a big *tick* for the character and helps to enamour audiences to Viggo & his journey even more..

I'm a great fan of the strong & rich vein of pity and forgiveness that runs through Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, and at the end of the day I am happy if those virtues in some form or another are able to pervade the film version as well.. Whilst this scene is an example of how the book deals with this fundamental notion in an infinitely more erudite manner, the instant effect & the essential truism that in his own way PJ is trying to relay similar themes for similar scenes, means that these differences are on the whole admissible (IMHO)

[Valandil]

In response to "Dunedain's" question from a week ago - it was Thengel, father of Theoden, whom Aragorn served - just prior to serving Ecthelion in Gondor. We are told that he served in both places "in disguise" - and so 40 years later, may not have been recognized at all as the same man who helped in earlier days - even in the (likely) event that he and Theoden had met. We know that Aragorn used the name Thorongil while in Ecthelion's service - and it seems reasonable to think he used that same identity in Rohan - as in Gondor, he was known to have come from Rohan, but that he was not one of the Rohirrim. (Who WAS that masked man? I dunno... but he left this here silver bullet... uh, arrowhead!)

And... in general, I LIKE the movies, and their depictions, but when I was watching the preview for ROTK, it just DROVE ME UP THE WALL, that the film-makers speaking kept calling the Rohirrim, "The Rohans"!!!:mad:

At least it was just in the narrative - haven't heard that make it into the movies yet.

[smaug_the_magnificent]

Originally posted by Tuor of Gondolin
"
I just hope PJ doesn't mess up one of the best bits in the book (Theoden's speech to the troops and his charge at the Pelennor Fields). That just has to be read aloud like poetry, even if you're by yourself.

Arise, arise, Riders of Theoden!
Fell deeds awake: fire and slaughter!
spear shall be shaken, shield be splintered,
a sword-day, a red day, ere the sun rises!
Ride now, ride now! Ride to Gondor!



Unfortunately I think that's unlikey to be done verbatim.. At least the "Fell deeds awake!" line has already be used, in The Two Towers, in the scene at Helm's Deep.

However, in The Return of the King teaser trailer which was shown on the recent DVD release, there is a line (one would assume said by Theoden) which calls..."Ride, ride now, to a world ending!!" ..There might have been other parts to it that I can't recall at this moment, but it certainly ended in that fashion while the theatre being played out was of the Rohirrim charge.. I can't say for sure if "to a world ending" is in the book (my guess is that it's not) but personally speaking, I think it's a great & epic quote and sets the mood perfectly, perhaps even better than "ride to Gondor!"

[Valandil]

Now I think THAT quote is said by Eomer in the book - when he leads the riders back into the fray - from where Theoden and Eowyn fell (and he thinks they're BOTH dead). I'm going from memory, but check chapter on the Battle of Pelennor Fields. So again - PJ is using a lot of Tolkien quotes (99% of the best lines in the movies!) so we have nothing to fear.

[smaug_the_magnificent]

In the main, that is spot on.. Someone commented somewhere here recently about how they fear so few quotes & language from the text will be used in the movie, The Return of the King..

To that, firstly I say look at the previous two films for some level or reassurance - sure, there's been some non-Tolkien lines used (which surely must've be foreseen), but generally speaking I think we've been very lucky in this respect as a lot of the original & beautiful prose has found its way on screen.. I don't mind if the lines have been moved around, been placed in different scenes or have been said by different characters - what's important is that people are getting a taste of Tolkien's discourse through the (popular medium of the) movies.. Most of the great lines that could have reasonably been expected to be included on film, have done so..

[Wayfarer]

Must... Bash... Jackson...

Yaahhh...

[Gamigar]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by b.banner
who else hates theoden in the movie .i mean his character is good but sometimes i get annoyed at him in the movie.i mean the way he talks to aragorn and gimli i mean he is a jerk;) [/QUOTE/]

I beg to differ, he is quite stubborn, but wouldn't you be if you were under so much stress, and having someone[Saruman] try to take over your kingdom?:o

[Varda Oiolosseo]

I thought he was ok in the movie.
Like people have said he must have been stressed and probably a little confused about what was going on and he had just lost his son.

But that's my opinion and everyone else do have good points too.

[SamNotSoWise]

We need to remember that Theoden, though one of the greatest ever kings of Rohan, is of the "lesser" breed of men.

He is not really Aragorn's equal, since Aragorn is of the race of Kings and is more closely related to Elrond than the Rohirrim.

I liked him in the movie, except for his exorcism which was WAY over done. The one I didn't like was Faramir, but that's another thread.

[Sister Golden Hair]

I liked him in the movie, except for his exorcism which was WAY over done. The one I didn't like was Faramir, but that's another thread. That reminds me of something Rian said to me off the board when I asked her if she liked the Two Towers movie. She replied: "I didn't care much for the exorcism by Gandalf of the demonically posessed, cobweb covered Theoden." That just struck me funny.:D

[Ainaromenel]

In my mind's eye I thought the way Theoden was portrayed physically was off. I always imagined him to be older, seeing how according to the timeline in the Appendix B he was 71 years old when the Two Towers took place. I definately think that Gandalf's exorcisim bit was way off. I imagined it more of Gandalf telling Theoden to stand up, and he does it. Kinda like how Jesus would tell a cripple to stand up, and they did it (though I am not saying Gandalf's power matches Jesus's power, just using it as an example ;) ). I think there was alot more of a choice on Theoden's part to actually put away his doubts and fears, which were the real things that held him back.

In the movie I suppose Theoden did have the right to do what he wanted in his own kingdom, but Aragorn was directly related to Elros, Elrond's brother, and even farther back to Melian, a Maia (read the Silmarillion if you don't know what I'm talking about). Aragorn was definately the higher in regard to lineage. I think he showed better prudence in the book by not being so rude in another man's kingdom, showing not only that he was humble, but also that he was yet ready to truely take on his task as being the respective King of Gondor and Arnor.

Theoden is an interesting character, and though I think he was much calmer in words in the book (as he took Merry to be a knight in his army and wanted to hear about the Shire) , the movie did a decent job at portraying his role. They gave him alot of struggles, which people have talked about, which adds depth to the character. But as I think it is with the movies in their entirety, the books show SO much more depth in all aspects of Middle Earth. I am sorry to those who have not read the books.

[hectorberlioz]

oh yeah. theodens excorcism was really way off....

[Elfhelm]

I rolled my eyes the first time I saw it. I like the way it is in the book, with the light streaming in from above and Gandalf driving off Grima, then Theoden gradually gets his wits back. Saruman didn't posess him, he was hypnotized.

[hectorberlioz]

Exactly. Hypnotized not possessed.
Grima's lies.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

"Exactly. Hypnotized not possessed."

Or, perhaps, brainwashed. The actual scene calls for a far more subtle approach then in the movie. But at least they didn't toss Gimli at him.
A real problem with the scene is that it could briefly take you out of that world because of its "Exorcist" similarity and facile handling of the scene. I think JRRT was cited as saying somewhere something like (when that happens it takes you out of the subcreation and you find yourself looking in on a failed subcreated world from the outside).

[hectorberlioz]

Alright, Brainwashed is more aproppriate.
Grima fed his lies and deciet to theoden with a spoon.

[Black Breathalizer]

The film's handling of Theoden's release from under Saruman's thrall was pure genius. It could not have been handled better given the film's time constraints.

A few thoughts about it:

1. I find it amusing that Purists lash out against Saruman's possession of Theoden as being so unnatural in a fantasy world filled with Ents, a jolly nature spirit, Werebears, goblins, talking eagles, wizards and evil wraiths. Give me a break. :rolleyes:

2. Screenplays are all about presenting the plot and character motivations in visual ways. It is not uncommon for screenplays based on books to ratchet things up a bit. This is all that PJ did in this case. The basic underlying plot remained true to Tolkien.

3. A strict adherence to the book on this point wouldn't have worked nearly as well. Jackson rightly understood that the scenes involving Theoden return from the darkness would be much more bold and dramatic if handled in this fashion.

[Melko Belcha]

Pure genius? Give me a break, I found the scene embarassing and laughable. It was closer to something I would expect from a D&D movie, not from Tolkien's work. I find the Theoden exorcism as one of the most horrible scenes in the films, it was just poorly thought out and a slap in the face to Tolkien.

[Sister Golden Hair]

I find it amusing that Purists lash out against Saruman's possession of Theoden as being so unnatural in a fantasy world filled with Ents, a jolly nature spirit, Werebears, goblins, talking eagles, wizards and evil wraiths. Give me a break.Well, the problem is that that fantasy world is Tolkien's, not PJ's. And as I said in the "Taming of Jackson" thread, this scene is a joke. It didn't happen that way in the book, so why do it in the movie? There are many other ways that PJ could and did build the movie up, staying semi-true to the books, but when he foundered, it was 100%. Nomatter how much you like the movies, you cannot justify this scene. It was totally stupid. Tolkien created a beautiful fantasy world, but it is his, not Jackson's

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Melko Belcha
Pure genius? Give me a break, I found the scene embarassing and laughable. It was closer to something I would expect from a D&D movie, not from Tolkien's work. I find the Theoden exorcism as one of the most horrible scenes in the films, it was just poorly thought out and a slap in the face to Tolkien. Couldn't have said it better myself. as a matteroffact, I did say it, in the "Taming" thread.:)

[Ainaromenel]

Tolkien created a beautiful fantasy world, but it is his, not Jackson's

Awesome Point Sister Golden Hair. I couldn't agree more. I hate how the whole movie business ruins books by twisting things around and making things "more exciting". Jurrasic Park, The Counte of Monte Cristo, and so many other books were taken apart, changing the plot, and ruining the authors work. It's like if someone were to take one of Bethoveen's symphonys and add in a bunch of tunes and take out stuff and rerelase it. Not all books have to be forced into molding it to make it a hit in theaters. Just because everyone else does it doesn't mean it has to be that way. The Theoden exorcism left Theoden looking like he had less will power, that he was just being tossed around from one powerful controller to the next. Gandalf forced the changes on him in the movie. Theoden made the changes for himself in the book. There's a huge difference.

[Black Breathalizer]

I find it interesting how some of you people want it both ways.

On one hand, Faramir's "sudden" change from "bad guy to good guy" of his own free will was - in the words of many of you Purists - hokey, abrupt, and not realistic.

Yet, you want me to believe that if Jackson had taken the same approach with Theoden, you would have all said, "Attaboy, PJ. Great job!" Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, gang. I believe you. :rolleyes:

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
I find it interesting how some of you people want it both ways.

On one hand, Faramir's "sudden" change from "bad guy to good guy" of his own free will was - in the words of many of you Purists - hokey, abrupt, and not realistic.

Yet, you want me to believe that if Jackson had taken the same approach with Theoden, you would have all said, "Attaboy, PJ. Great job!" Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, gang. I believe you. :rolleyes: Anytime Jackson would stay true to the books would be a plus for him. The thing with the two examples you give is that that didn't happen with either of them. There was never a need or reason for Faramir to be made a bad guy. There was never a reason to exercise Theoden.

[Elfhelm]

For the record, if you characterize other people's opinions as "lashing out" when they are just chatting, or you respond to one person as "you people", you are engaging in the same subtle distortion that Grima uses on Theoden. Do not assume that we are so stupid we can't see through your rhetorical tricks.

I guess by your logic, Shakespeare should have Iago posess Othello, since we're all too dumb to figure it out otherwise.

The moral of the story is, If you take a cynic for your chief counselor, you will fall into despair. A Tolkienesque point that the PJ alteration completely loses.

[hectorberlioz]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
I find it interesting how some of you people want it both ways.

On one hand, Faramir's "sudden" change from "bad guy to good guy" of his own free will was - in the words of many of you Purists - hokey, abrupt, and not realistic.

Yet, you want me to believe that if Jackson had taken the same approach with Theoden, you would have all said, "Attaboy, PJ. Great job!" Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, gang. I believe you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ummm....PJ did take the same approach. Theoden suddenly becomes 'good guy' from 'bad guy' just as it happened so suddenly to faramir. Actually faramir's 'transition took longer than theodens did.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
The film's handling of Theoden's release from under Saruman's thrall was pure genius. It could not have been handled better given the film's time constraints.

Just a second while I clean the throw-up from my keyboard.




Okay - Better now. Damn - got it on the monitor too. Just a sec again....

You have got to be joking me. And you expect US to take YOU seriously when you spew this crap? Give me a break - you have demonstrated by your comments more than any of us so-called purists that you are the one who is blind. Blinded by Jackson's propaganda and the hollywood industry. You obviously like spoonfed movies.

1. I find it amusing that Purists lash out against Saruman's possession of Theoden as being so unnatural in a fantasy world filled with Ents, a jolly nature spirit, Werebears, goblins, talking eagles, wizards and evil wraiths. Give me a break. :rolleyes:

The only real thing out of place in Tolkien's Lord of the Rings - is Tom Bombadil. Just because you feel that you can do anything in Tolkiens world because of what you have listed Tolkien presented - doesn't mean an outsider should.

2. Screenplays are all about presenting the plot and character motivations in visual ways. It is not uncommon for screenplays based on books to ratchet things up a bit. This is all that PJ did in this case. The basic underlying plot remained true to Tolkien.

They don't have to dumb down the movie in the process. I'm sure you have never seen a movie like Dr Zhivago either or Momento.

3. A strict adherence to the book on this point wouldn't have worked nearly as well. Jackson rightly understood that the scenes involving Theoden return from the darkness would be much more bold and dramatic if handled in this fashion.
Why do you think it wouldn't have - because Jackson didn't do it that way and the way Jackson did it was the absolute only way for it to work? I love how you use words like "pure Genius" and "rightly understood" to describe Jackson. The problem I find - is he had no love or understanding for Tolkien's work. His motivation was just to make a cool fantasy film (which I consider Excalibur to be a thousand times better and far more enjoyable).

As a side note to you BB - I wish you would stop misquoting me. I have said as films - they are a C in my book. That means - as films I find them acceptable and average. Nothing more. I find them to be on the same level as Terminator 3 (which I think is the best out of the series). They are not thought provoking movies - they are just action flicks. Get over yourself already Grima Wormtongue.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
On one hand, Faramir's "sudden" change from "bad guy to good guy" of his own free will was - in the words of many of you Purists - hokey, abrupt, and not realistic.

I think the complaint is generally that Faramir was made "evil" at in the movie. Jackson had NO reason to present Faramir in that way - anymore than he had a reason to have Aragorn running from his destiny and heritage.

Yet, you want me to believe that if Jackson had taken the same approach with Theoden, you would have all said, "Attaboy, PJ. Great job!" Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, gang. I believe you. :rolleyes:
Grima was the one who had brainwashed Theoden - as has been said. Why waste movie time having Gandlaf fight Saruman through Theoden. It's cheap hollywood crap.

[jerseydevil]

BB - I just had a question that I've been wondering for a while. Are you Jackson in real life or one of the other people involved in the movie? Also - have you ever read Lord of the Rings - or are you just talking out your a$$?

[Ainaromenel]

Ok, lets get a grip here folks. We are just leaving little replys on a discussion board on a site on the internet, none of us know who anyone else is, and in the end we would all defend our right to have our own opinion. There are other boards here that one person clearly disagrees with someone else, but rather than being rude or making crude jokes (jerseydevil;) ), they JUST back themselves up with reasoning. No one is ever going to take anyone else seriously if we all are being jerks about someone elses view. Ok now I'll get off my rather large soapbox and get on with it. :)

I'd agree with all of those that say Faramir's change in character is just as bad as Theoden's. If you read the books, Frodo and Sam actually go away from Faramir feeling happy. And yeah, Faramir may have let them leave in the movie, but I'd be hard pressed to believe there were no ill feelings on the part of the Hobbits. The Faramir of the books is probably my favorite character in LotR, but after watching the movie, I wonder how in the world they're gonna have him hook up with Eowyn in the third movie. I guess before I pass my final judgement on the Two Towers, I would like to see the extended version DVD. And who knows, maybe they'll have some flash backs or something in RotK and Theoden and Faramir will be like "Man, I was a jerk."

One can only hope!

[hectorberlioz]

Good going Ainaromenel.
Ainaromenel the peace maker.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Ainaromenel
Ok, lets get a grip here folks. We are just leaving little replys on a discussion board on a site on the internet, none of us know who anyone else is, and in the end we would all defend our right to have our own opinion. There are other boards here that one person clearly disagrees with someone else, but rather than being rude or making crude jokes (jerseydevil;) ), they JUST back themselves up with reasoning. No one is ever going to take anyone else seriously if we all are being jerks about someone elses view. Ok now I'll get off my rather large soapbox and get on with it. :)

I'm not going to apologize for my comment. And no - no one does know if BB is Jackson trying to convince the people on one of the largest Tolkien Bulletin Boards to accept his changes. :p Also - I have no idea whether BB has ever read the books. From the sound of it - I would say no. If that is the case - then he is talking out his a$$. He may have read them however - but I bet he only read them once and found them boring or something. It seems like he is more than satisified with the formulaic movies and books.

I guess before I pass my final judgement on the Two Towers, I would like to see the extended version DVD. And who knows, maybe they'll have some flash backs or something in RotK and Theoden and Faramir will be like "Man, I was a jerk."

Why? The official and final version of the movie was what was in the theater - not the extended edition DVD that is just being used to make extra money. Granted - the cut scenes may shed some light on things - but I seriously doubt there would be much in there to save Faramir from his current jerkiness in TT. I liked Faramir in the book - he was so different than his brother.

[hectorberlioz]

hmm...
Ainaromenel might be PJ himself...
lol.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by hectorberlioz
hmm...
Ainaromenel might be PJ himself...
lol.
No - I think BB is Jackson and Ainaromenel is Philippa Boyens. :D

[hectorberlioz]

Lol.:p :p :p

[Ainaromenel]

:) Or MAYBE jerseydevil and Hectorberlioz are just disgruntled extras who didn't make it into the final cut of the movie.

lol

Anyhow, jerseydevil, I was just poking fun at you about puking all over your computer. I actually thought that was pretty funny. I don't know, I completely agree with you that BB's ideas about the movie are messed up. They should read the books, but I think everyone should too. It bugs me when people really don't know what they are talking about after watching the messed up movie. I love forming in my head my own ideas about what things look like in the book. That's part of the joy of reading, at least to me. I like the movies for the pure fact that it's a good action movie. Not to the credit of PJ, but to Tolkien for giving him the inspiration. Maybe I am easily amused. Probably.

I don't know if you have seen the extended version of FotR, but it actually does add more depth to the characters, in longer scenes and stuff. I am giving TT extended edition the benifit of the doubt, whether it deserves it or not. And as much as the movies may stray from the books, I do give them credit for making the movie look good. They actually made all the chain mail, and so on and so forth. Is it worth having a live version of it if it goes so far from the book? I don't know. That's probably best left for each person to decide. FotR was much much better than TT, but TT did have some good parts too. Well, replace some with hardly any and good with mediocre. I'll just leave off with that exaggeration.

Just lettin you know I'm not getting down on you. I think it would produce a more "vibrant" discussion if the then he is talking out his a$$ stuff was left out, because that just leaves BB feeling like an idiot. Which they maybe on this point, but maybe we can convince them to read the books. I'd like them to really enjoy LotR. But oh well, not a big deal. You all probably think I'm a freak or something. mumblemumble mumble... :p

So BB, maybe you oughta take a look at jerseydevil's points. They make sense! Hope you try to reread the books.

God bless everybody!

[jerseydevil]

Ainaromenel -

I was just messing with you. Serious when it comes to BB - him and I have gone around and around about the movies.

As for the extended edition - I have it, along with the theatrical version. They did add in a lot into the extended edition - a lot that in my opinion should have been kept in - while reducing down some of the needless action - like the wizards duel. There is NO reason in my mind to take out such an important part as the gift giving scene.

Also - the extended edition still can not correct so much of jackson's screw ups - like Aragorn running from his destiny. :rolleyes:

BB won't look at my points because he thinks his opinions are the only one's that matter.

By the way - should I put you down for the Jackson Lynch mob? You can check out the Taming of Jackson thread if you want to know what it's all about. :D Oh - and no I don't think you are a freak.

[The Gaffer]

Originally posted by jerseydevil

Why do you think it wouldn't have - because Jackson didn't do it that way and the way Jackson did it was the absolute only way for it to work? I love how you use words like "pure Genius" and "rightly understood" to describe Jackson. The problem I find - is he had no love or understanding for Tolkien's work. His motivation was just to make a cool fantasy film (which I consider Excalibur to be a thousand times better and far more enjoyable).

I don't think you can accuse a film-maker who spent so many years painstakingly recreating Tolkien's cultures as having no love or understanding of the book.

This is a difficult scene for book-savvy viewers. In the book, it's pretty vague what's going on here, so I imagine we all have different ideas about what was happening. It would be interesting to hear what people thought was happening in that scene, exactly.

Jackson played out an exaggerated interpretation of it, clearly aimed at the multiplex cattle to be sure they understood that this bloke was under some sort of spell of Saruman. However, it also appears to be Jackson's style and no doubt could have been done with more subtlety.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
I don't think you can accuse a film-maker who spent so many years painstakingly recreating Tolkien's cultures as having no love or understanding of the book.

He only worked painstakingly on the special effects and the scenary. The rest he changed to make an action movie. He did NOT work to keep the movies true to the book. Also - based on his commentary in FotR - I question his motifivation and love for the book. So yes - I can say he had no love or understanding of the books.

This is a difficult scene for book-savvy viewers. In the book, it's pretty vague what's going on here, so I imagine we all have different ideas about what was happening. It would be interesting to hear what people thought was happening in that scene, exactly.

NO WHERE does Tolkien describe an exorcism and battling Saruman through Theoden's body and mind.

Jackson played out an exaggerated interpretation of it, clearly aimed at the multiplex cattle to be sure they understood that this bloke was under some sort of spell of Saruman. However, it also appears to be Jackson's style and no doubt could have been done with more subtlety.
Cleary he did - because he is a horror/action movie directer. He doesn't know how to bring interest to a film without hack and slash and cheap jokes. A more acomplished director (who loved the books) could have done a better job.

And actually - you are wrong about Theoden being under a "spell" of Saruman. He was just convinced or as someone said earlier - brainwashed by Wormtongue. There wasn't any direct sorcery involved. I still find it funny how in FotR commentary Jackson states that he hates cheap hollywood wizarding things - and then he gives us at least two. Saruman is causing the storm over the Misty Mountains and Saruman is possessing Theoden's body. :rolleyes: I also thought the wizards duel was completely overblown and ridiculous too. In the book he just tricks Gandalf into going up to the top of Orthanc and trapping him.

[Black Breathalizer]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
And actually - you are wrong about Theoden being under a "spell" of Saruman. He was just convinced or as someone said earlier - brainwashed by Wormtongue. I realize you are one of those literal interpretation, fundamentalist types, jerseydevil, but Tolkien wrote the King of the Golden Hall chapter in a way that is very open to such an interpretation. If Theoden was simply being misled or brainwashed by Grima, why did Tolkien feel the need to have Gandalf use powerful magic within the Golden Hall??? Gandalf was surely a more powerful counselor than Wormtongue. So why was it so critical to Tolkien that Gandalf talk Hama into letting him keep his staff??? Why would magic be involved at all if this was simply a Gandalf vs. Wormtongue battle for Theoden's ear?

One of the beauties of Tolkien is that his story is not nearly as black and white as you literalists would like us to believe. Thank heavens Jackson didn't give us jerseydevil's simplistic, one dimensional view of Tolkien's great work.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
I realize you are one of those literal interpretation, fundamentalist types, jerseydevil, but Tolkien wrote the King of the Golden Hall chapter in a way that is very open to such an interpretation. If Theoden was simply being misled or brainwashed by Grima, why did Tolkien feel the need to have Gandalf use powerful magic within the Golden Hall??? Gandalf was surely a more powerful counselor than Wormtongue. So why was it so critical to Tolkien that Gandalf talk Hama into letting him keep his staff??? Why would magic be involved at all if this was simply a Gandalf vs. Wormtongue battle for Theoden's ear?

Because of Wormtogue's wicked tongue. That is the only thing that I think Saruman had "enchanted". I have always felt that Saruman had done something to Grima that produced an effect on the "weak of mind" to believe what Grima said. This is what Gandalf fought against in the book - NOT Saruman through Theoden.

One of the beauties of Tolkien is that his story is not nearly as black and white as you literalists would like us to believe. Thank heavens Jackson didn't give us jerseydevil's simplistic, one dimensional view of Tolkien's great work.
Yeah - instead he gave us a dumbed down, spoon fed, action flick you seem to have enjoyed so much. :rolleyes:

[Draken]

Bernard Hill is a top actor and plays the part well I reckon - though for those of us old enough to remember he'll never top his role as Yosser Hughes in 'Boys from the Blackstuff'

BB - ey, ey, calm down - it's just a film!

[Lizra]

Bernard!! Where are you! :D Where's my perfume? ;)

[Black Breathalizer]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Because of Wormtogue's wicked tongue. That is the only thing that I think Saruman had "enchanted". I have always felt that Saruman had done something to Grima that produced an effect on the "weak of mind" to believe what Grima said. This is what Gandalf fought against in the book - NOT Saruman through Theoden.See how easy you people fall into the trap of thinking your view is THE ONE AND ONLY truth about Tolkien's story??? Your OPINION is not grounded in the text any more or less than Jackson's.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

Oroginally posted by jerseydevil
"And actually - you are wrong about Theoden being under a "spell" of Saruman. He was just convinced or as someone said earlier - brainwashed by Wormtongue. There wasn't any direct sorcery involved. I still find it funny how in FotR commentary Jackson states that he hates cheap hollywood wizarding things - and then he gives us at least two. Saruman is causing the storm over the Misty Mountains and Saruman is possessing Theoden's body. I also thought the wizards duel was completely overblown and ridiculous too. In the book he just tricks Gandalf into going up to the top of Orthanc and trapping him."
__________________________________________________ __

While I actually have been overall surprised at the effort put into the films (I'd give them so far a grade of "B" when I anticipated they would have earned a "D", some changes, like those above, are rather exasperating, especially the treatment of Caradhras. One thing which gives depth to Middle-earth are some of the shades of grey (the Rohirrim being "good guys" who nevertheless behave towards the Dunlendings rather like American settlers and the United States has towards American Indians), and the concept of "autonomous" good and evil forces. Having Saruman virtually directly controlling wormtongue and Caradhras really makes Middle-earth less threatening for the hobbits et al., just remove Saruman and then deal with Sauron. Caradhras as a cranky "force" is a much more unsettling idea, more difficult to deal with and to explain. I assume it was done to give Christopher Lee more to do. As for the wizards' duel!!
But there is much admirable in the films, even the Two Towers (for the first hour, at least) and some other bits later. And, the exorcism out, Theoden's part is generally well done.

[Ainaromenel]

First to answer The Gaffer's call to what people imagined when they read the part about Theoden's coming around, here's kinda how I pictured it:

Gandalf and company go into the hall to meet the words of Grima. Gandalf and Grima have some discourse, and after Grima says something bad about Galadriel, Gimli was gonna fight him, but Gandalf held him back. Gandalf sings a little song about her, then he causes the whole room to be dark. Grima yells something stupid like "You shouldn't have let him bring his staff!" Then a FLASH, and Grima is on his face, knocked out. Later, Theoden gives Grima a chance to rectify himself, but he doesn't, and Grima runs off to Orthanac. Then Gandalf starts up a little speach of encouragement, and Theoden kinda wakes up and starts walking around. Gandalf gives more encouragement, and Theoden throws aside his cane and takes up his sword.

That's how I see it. And that's basically how the book describes it. I disagree with The Gaffer, and I would say that Tolkien does a good job of describing the events, and not a whole lot is up to interpretation, at least how I see it.

Now BB-
I would say that completely seperate from the books, as it's own entity, yes, the movie's version of it is pretty neat. Jerseydevil's gonna kill me here ;) , but if it is left to it's own, the movie is neat. And PJ does a decent job in getting good camra angles and making it all look like it's really happening, like the events are actually real. The sets and the actors are incredible. And, again, if completely outside comparing it to the book, then yes, I think it is fine.

HOWEVER. IF one compares the movie version to the book version (you all may want to go back and read it, that whole little scene only takes like two or three pages), the movie is horribly not accurate to the way the book describes things. Instead of making Theoden's true character come out, and really reveal him to be a great king dispite a lack of long lineage, Theoden just looks like he wasn't strong enough to do it himself, and Gandalf had to do everything. Why did Gandalf bring in his staff? To knock out Grima! (with lightening). Not to force Sauruman out of Theoden.

In my view the movies did actually have a lot of work put into them, and I give them an "A" for effort. For following the book, at least a "D-", probably a low "F".

If anyone watches the movies and expects to see what they read in the books, they are going to be disappointed. If the veiwer allows for some (alot of huge) changes, then I think they can have an enjoyable experience.

One last thing I'd like to mention that I haven't seen anyone else say. The thing I was more appalled with regarding Theoden wasn't the exorcism scene, but the fact that he looked YOUNG! He was 70 for goodness sakes. And he SURE did not get younger in the book! Ok ok, I'll eat my own words and acknowledge the fact that when PJ got the rights to the movie he also got the right to "artistically" change things in the plot/characters/scenes and so on. But who's really keeping count, huh?

And can you all tell that I really enjoy talking about this kinda thing, since I write so much every time? :D thought I'd throw that in there too.

[Black Breathalizer]

Originally posted by Tuor of Gondolin
As for the wizards' duel!!Yes, let's discuss the source of much Literalist teethnashing: The Wizards Duel.

The capture of Gandalf wasn't a Jackson invention. Having Gandalf held prisoner on top of Orthanc wasn't a Jackson invention either. Through Gandalf's account at the Council of Elrond, Tolkien described how Gandalf was captured and later rescued. Are we all still together and in sync on this much?

Okay, gang....how did Gandalf lose control of his staff??? Would you have us believe he simply admitted defeat and handed it over to Saruman? How did he get to the top of Orthanc? Did he shrug his shoulders in dispair and say, "okay, Saruman ol' buddy, I guess I have no choice," and walk willing up flights of stairs to get there? If so, I must say your Literalist Gandalf was quite the milktoast weenie!!!

Remember the story is told in the book from GANDALF's POINT OF VIEW. Is he going to describe to an esteemed group of friends and allies at the Council of Elrond the details of how he got the crap beat out of him? Of course not.

Do we know EXACTLY what happened from Tolkien's POV? No. But my point once again is that Jackson's version is every bit as consistent and logical as anything your Literalists envisioned. So the next time you feel feel inclined to whine that the wizard duel is not true to Tolkien, consider how unrealistic YOUR personal version of the actual capture would have been if filmed.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Sounds like fanfiction or roleplay. Reading between the lines and drawing your own conclusions to the unwritten word. Is that your point, BB?

[jerseydevil]

His version does sound like fanfiction - especially since Gandalf had NO reason to lie to the council. To suggest otherwise would mean that Gandalf had an ego and pride which could be hurt. I believe this is not the case - so yes - Gandalf TRUSTED Sarumen in the book ALL the way up ot the top of Orthanc - as described in the book.

BB - where does Tolkien describe a FIGHT between Saruman and Gandalf through Theoden???? Whered does it even SUGGEST that Theoden was possessed by Saruman?

[Elfhelm]

Once again, BB, you are baiting people by categorizing and dehumanizing them. When they cease being individuals and are only "literalists", "purists", etc., they will forever be inclined to fight you and disinclined to give your points any consideration.

Once again, JD, you are exagerating and distorting other people's opinions. The only response they could possibly have to that is to try to re-word their opinions, which in the end is merely repetitive and unproductive.

The fact is, BB has re-read the books many times just like the other JRRT fans here. If people were to actually browse the Books forum they would see some very lively discussions which could never take place without a good knowledge of the texts.

And obviosly, PJ has far to much work to do at this moment to waste his time arguing with me. It would be preposterously egotistical to presume that PJ would even consider my opinion. If I were one of the artists whose paintings inspired him, or one of the linguists who has written about Tolkien's invented languages, maybe he would ask my opinion. But since I'm just a fellow reader, I see no reason why he would care what I think.

I don't like the way they handled Theoden's problems because they missed the point, as I stated above.

But they certainly have been more attentive to the original text than they were to any of Phillip K. Dick's novels. And even though we are Tolkien fans here, we have no business saying that Dick is less important and that therefore it is OK to screw up his stuff.

So I can understand why this constant objection to minor changes could bother some people. But IMHO the movies are good.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

BB has a point about the movie's opting for a more visual confrontation of the wizards, which also moves the story quickly along. My criticism of it is fairly minor. But as for
__________________________________________________ _

"Okay, gang....how did Gandalf lose control of his staff??? Would you have us believe he simply admitted defeat and handed it over to Saruman? How did he get to the top of Orthanc? Did he shrug his shoulders in dispair and say, "okay, Saruman ol' buddy, I guess I have no choice," and walk willing up flights of stairs to get there?"
__________________________________________________ _
Well, actually, yes. Gandalf, perhaps carelessly, walked into a trap. He was surrounded by many orcs and Dunlendings, and an Istari who at that time was presumably more powerful then Gandalf, as the senior of the order. Gandalf was in the position of a soldier surrounded by a vastly superior force. In that case the only rational option was surrender, including his weapon (staff).
And would two maia engage in a street fight, getting bloody noses, when the outcome could not be in doubt?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
Once again, JD, you are exagerating and distorting other people's opinions. The only response they could possibly have to that is to try to re-word their opinions, which in the end is merely repetitive and unproductive.

I am stating my opinions and saying how ridiculous I feel BB's constant support of Jackson is. Words such as "pure genius" don't describe Jackson in my view. I feel - as do many others that Jackson created an action movie and left out the feeling behind the characters as well as some very important emotional and character development scenes. The Giving of Gifts is one. He completely did a hack job on the Flight to the Ford, the scene on Weathertop was overblown, the Troll fight in Moria carried on way too long, the list goes on and on.

The fact is, BB has re-read the books many times just like the other JRRT fans here. If people were to actually browse the Books forum they would see some very lively discussions which could never take place without a good knowledge of the texts.

Well that may be the case - but he doesn't come across it here.

And obviosly, PJ has far to much work to do at this moment to waste his time arguing with me. It would be preposterously egotistical to presume that PJ would even consider my opinion. If I were one of the artists whose paintings inspired him, or one of the linguists who has written about Tolkien's invented languages, maybe he would ask my opinion. But since I'm just a fellow reader, I see no reason why he would care what I think.
[/b]
My sister worked in Hollywood PR - you would be surprised how much they do care. Or at least try to convince people of how great their stuff is. Anything that is printed or televised about an artist gets clipped by a clipping agency and sent to the PR firm. She usually they don't go to the web - but they would if it was a big enough discussion or site.


So I can understand why this constant objection to minor changes could bother some people. But IMHO the movies are good.
In my opinion they are average I as I have said. If it wasn't "Lord of the Rings" on the cover - I don't even think I would own the DVDs.

[Ruinel]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
...The fact is, BB has re-read the books many times just like the other JRRT fans here. If people were to actually browse the Books forum they would see some very lively discussions which could never take place without a good knowledge of the texts.....
O.o
Where has BB posted in the Books forum? I'd like to know, because I've never seen him post there. Perhaps I've just overlooked his posts, or perhaps he's posting under a different name.

[Elfhelm]

This thread was originally about Theoden. It has turned into an insult BB thread. Has everyone had their overreaction to BB's "pure genius" comment now? He loves the movies. So what?

Do you think Theoden is an ass in the movie? Is that the way you think the character should have been portrayed?

[Black Breathalizer]

Yes, we wants to know too. Why do the nasty mooters insult poor, poor BB. We tries to be nice to them, don't we, preciousss? We tries to debate nice and be friends. But cruel, wicked posters hurts us.

I told you they were tricksey. I told you they were rude...

[Elfhelm]

I thought I explained that already. When you turn individuals with diverse opinions into various "-ists" you upset them and they go defensive. It's called de-humanizing, or objectifying.

[Ainaromenel]

So that Theoden guy, what a character, huh? I mean, the old chap died by having his trusty horse fall on him! Ya know, Theoden seemed pretty cool to me though, like when he was chillen with Merry and listening to stories of the shire. I think that's pretty cool. So yeah. BB, nice impression of Smeagol. I liked it.

Go Bengals!

[Black Breathalizer]

The Scene: Tolkien's Council of Elrond where Gandalf describes the details of his capture:
The words of Tolkien:
Gandalf: "They took me and they set me alone on the pinnacle of Orthanc."Suddenly a man stands up and waves his hand.

Black Breathalizer: Yoohoo, Gandalf. I have a question. Your description leaves the specifics of your capture awfully vague and open to debate. How EXACTLY did "they take you"???

Gandalf: I think that's irrelevant to my tale. The important thing is that Saruman held me against my will.

Black Breathalizer: I understand completely, Sir. Since this part of the tale is told second hand, you're leaving it to our imaginations to visualize the specifics. But while it's really all we need to know for the novel, the problem is that Peter Jackson made a film showing your capture in real-time.

Gandalf: So what?

Black Breathalizer: Well, PJ ASSUMED you wouldn't accept your captivity without a fight while others who read your books ASSUMED you passively accepted your fate.

Gandalf: Do I strike you as the kind of wizard who would abandon Frodo to the ringwraiths that easily?

Black Breathalizer: N-N-No, Sir. It's just that these so-called "Purists" I was debating against were so darn sure they had you pegged. In fact, they were so adamant about their truth, they couldn't resist ridiculing Jackson for his version of events.

Gandalf: Tell these jokers they don't hold any patents on Tolkien truths.

[Lizra]

Well, I finally found Theoden/Bernard. He loves my perfume, and he doesn't care what you guys think! :p So...we'll be clinking crystal wine goblets by the fireplace, Cheers! :)

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
The Scene: Tolkien's Council of Elrond where Gandalf describes the details of his capture:
Suddenly a man stands up and waves his hand.

Black Breathalizer: Yoohoo, Gandalf. I have a question. Your description leaves the specifics of your capture awfully vague and open to debate. How EXACTLY did "they take you"???

Gandalf: I think that's irrelevant to my tale. The important thing is that Saruman held me against my will.

Black Breathalizer: I understand completely, Sir. Since this part of the tale is told second hand, you're leaving it to our imaginations to visualize the specifics. But while it's really all we need to know for the novel, the problem is that Peter Jackson made a film showing your capture in real-time.

Gandalf: So what?

Black Breathalizer: Well, PJ ASSUMED you wouldn't accept your captivity without a fight while others who read your books ASSUMED you passively accepted your fate.

Gandalf: Do I strike you as the kind of wizard who would abandon Frodo to the ringwraiths that easily?

Black Breathalizer: N-N-No, Sir. It's just that these so-called "Purists" I was debating against were so darn sure they had you pegged. In fact, they were so adamant about their truth, they couldn't resist ridiculing Jackson for his version of events.

Gandalf: Tell these jokers they don't hold any patents on Tolkien truths.
Great Jackson fanfiction. Jackson would be proud of you - however I'm sure Tolkien is rolling over in his grave.

Orthanc WAS Saruman's home and Saruman led Gandalf up to the top. Saruman was also more powerful - so why is it so impossible? Gandalf in the book clearly trusted Saruman until he took his staff and imprisoned him. Radagast also had no reason to distrust Saruman and had delivered the message to Gandalf to go to Isengard.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Ainaromenel


Go Bengals! As a loyal Browns fan I couldn't let that slide, those are fighting words. Meet me in the NFL thread in GMs. Down with the Bungles. GO BROWNS!

Back to Theoden. Sorry folks.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
As a loyal Browns fan, those are fighting words. Meet me in the NFL thread in GMs. Down with the Bungles. GO BROWNS!

I don't think a discussion of the Bengals or Browns belong in this thread. This isn't even general messages Forum. I suggest you go to the correct forum and thread. :p


Back to Theoden. Sorry folks.

Don't add this in after I post. :)

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I don't think a discussion of the Bengals or Browns belong in this thread. This isn't even general messages Forum. I suggest you go to the correct forum and thread. :p


Don't add this in after I post. :) Who the hell are you? Don't talk to me about being off topic. This thread has been off topic for two pages, no thanks to you.:p I will bop you with my stick so hard, that when you come to, your memory will be so bad that you will have forgotten everything you've read and you will be a loyal LotRs movie fan. Take that!:p :D

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
Who the hell are you? Don't talk to me about being off topic. This thread has been off topic for two pages, no thanks to you.:p I will bop you with my stick so hard, that when you come to, your memory will be so bad that you will have forgotten everything you've read and you will be a loyal LotRs movie fan. Take that!:p :D
You are evil - truly evil. You are cursing me to be like BB. :p

And I talked about Theoden - the scene sucked. One of the worst in the movie. :D

[Sister Golden Hair]

The fact is, BB has re-read the books many times just like the other JRRT fans here. If people were to actually browse the Books forum they would see some very lively discussions which could never take place without a good knowledge of the texts.I just want to bring this to the attention of Elfhelm. I did a thorough search on BB's posting in the book forums. He has started a total of two threads in the LotRs books forum. One in the Silmarillion forum. None in the Middle-earth forum. He has posted to four threads in the LotRs forum that were started by other people. Not an abundant amount I'd say. I'm not saying he hasn't read the books, but the majority of his posting is in the movie forum. Okay, enough of that.

We will now make a serious effort to get back on topic. The discussion is about Theoden. Not Gandalf, not Saruman, not the Browns and Bengals, not BB, but Theoden.
:)

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
We will now make a serious effort to get back on topic. The discussion is about Theoden. Not Gandalf, not Saruman, not the Browns and Bengals, not BB, but Theoden.
:)
I called BB - Grima Wormtongue - does that count? :p

[Ainaromenel]

Oh Theoden! Where for art thou Theoden?

Umm, this is a poem I wrote about Theoden:

Theoden Extempore
Theoden came from the land of the Rohirrim,
Not Rohans, or Gohans, but Rohirrim.
And ever did Theoden love to do,
Was to talk small talk and drink some brew.
Theoden found himself in a tight situation,
As the orcs of Sauruman were building up tension,
Who's master had a bought with the great Gandalf,
Leaving all people wondering which was Theoden's better half?
A prideful king? A pleasent merry chum?
Perhaps he just like to sit around on his bum.
For all the matters of Theoden great and small,
None would be as important as getting Grima out of his hall.
This limerick may now be coming to a close,
But lets not debate such frivolus things as who is wearing better clothes!


I hope that was on topic, but I can come up with more things too. My next piece could be Improvisate of Theoden . Goodnight, and God Bless!

[hectorberlioz]

Goodnight.Adieu.
as i said before "Ainaromenel the peace maker". Hope you werent offended earlier on by my speculation. I was just poking fun.

[hectorberlioz]

ok this is off topic, but i have to post it.
this is adressed to BB.
When I first came here,I was a PJ fanatic. And I saw people didnt agree with my views.
I was like "oh great i hate this place now" . However I started keeping my opinions to myself. Let them bash PJ and the movies.
Liking the movies does not mean you have to go to extreme lengths to protect PJ or his interpretation.
While liking the movies(and i like them a lot) I accept that PJ did not follow true to the books. I give PJ his points for the tings he did right. And I leave it at that.
BB, I'm not trying to be your counselor or anything,but, you're going to have to accept that some people arent going to ever like PJ or the movies. (and IF you ARE PJ:p, you're going to have to deal with it).
It all comes down to: Accept the faults,Give credit for the trueness.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

There once was a king named Theoden
Long a revered leader of Rohan.
He was duped by a Grima
But saved by a maia.
Then became a leader of men again.

[Elfhelm]

I mean, go to the Books forum and read the posts there now. I don't mean how many ever. Gee. Why not run those numbers on JD since he's inclined to attack people and call them non-readers? Why not tell us exactly where he has been spending his time here?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
I mean, go to the Books forum and read the posts there now. I don't mean how many ever. Gee. Why not run those numbers on JD since he's inclined to attack people and call them non-readers? Why not tell us exactly where he has been spending his time here?
I've read the books 12 times. I don't feel I have to prove it to anyone. I'm not the one saying that Jackson improved on Tolkien and was pure genius. When I have something to say on the books forums - I will. Others know I know the books because I talk to them - or help them with the games.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
I mean, go to the Books forum and read the posts there now. I don't mean how many ever. Gee. Why not run those numbers on JD since he's inclined to attack people and call them non-readers? Why not tell us exactly where he has been spending his time here? I already know that JD doesn't post much in the book forums. I also know that he does know the books. I didn't say BB hadn't read the books, but I have not read in the book forums any topic that he has posted to that is not in some way movie related. This is going to be the final word on this.

Everyone- If this thread does not get back on topic and stay there, it is going to be closed.

[hectorberlioz]

Okay, back on subject.
After a long time of his lies and deciet, Grima Wormtongue has made Theoden blind to logic and what is REALLY going on in the world. In a sense Grima has poisoned Theoden with his lies.

[Elfhelm]

I suspect that b.banner, the person who started this thread, hasn't read the books yet, either. (How's THAT for a segue?!) Theoden is one of Tolkien's favorite characters, I am certain, because he has a name that means "prince" in anglo-saxon, and that was Tolkien's specialty. The state that he is in as depicted in the movie is a sorry one, and I trust the movie-goers will come to love him. Did you see in the trailer that Pippin is swearing fealty to him? I think you'll all love that scene!

[Black Breathalizer]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Great Jackson fanfiction. ... Orthanc WAS Saruman's home and Saruman led Gandalf up to the top. Saruman was also more powerful - so why is it so impossible? Gandalf in the book clearly trusted Saruman until he took his staff and imprisoned him. Radagast also had no reason to distrust Saruman and had delivered the message to Gandalf to go to Isengard. Great Jerseydevil fanfiction. Show me in the book where Gandalf describes being led to the top of Orthanc.

It sure seems a tad hypocritical for jerseydevil and his Tolkien "Truth Squad" to be believe they're allowed to make assumptions based on the text but not Peter Jackson. Speaking of hypocritical...

Recently posted by Sister Golden Hair
Everyone- If this thread does not get back on topic and stay there, it is going to be closed.Previously posted to this thread by Sister Golden Hair
I did a thorough search on BB's posting in the book forums. He has started a total of two threads in the LotRs books forum. One in the Silmarillion forum. None in the Middle-earth forum. He has posted to four threads in the LotRs forum that were started by other people. Not an abundant amount I'd say. I'm not saying he hasn't read the books, but the majority of his posting is in the movie forum. Previously posted to this thread by Sister Golden Hair
I already know that JD doesn't post much in the book forums. I also know that he does know the books. I didn't say BB hadn't read the books, but I have not read in the book forums any topic that he has posted to that is not in some way movie related.Previously posted to this thread by Sister Golden Hair
As a loyal Browns fan I couldn't let that slide, those are fighting words. Meet me in the NFL thread in GMs. Down with the Bungles. GO BROWNS!Seems to me Sister Golden Hair ought to start practicing what she's preaching.

[The Gaffer]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
Did you see in the trailer that Pippin is swearing fealty to him?
I think, and hope, that it's Merry. Though you couldn't blame Jackson for switching them just to annoy everyone. ;)

Back to Theoden's exorcism: in the book this is referred to several times after the event as Gandalf's act of healing or restoration. For this reason I'd always marked the event as being fairly dramatic and important. Not least of the reasons is that we have Gandalf clearly fulfilling his role in Middle-Earth as one who inspires people to greatness.

A low-key rendition of the scene would have failed to convey this.

[Draken]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
His motivation was just to make a cool fantasy film (which I consider Excalibur to be a thousand times better and far more enjoyable).

Ah Excalibur, I loved that flick! Can we all go to Entertainment and discuss Cheri Lunghi as Guinevere? She made a big impression on an impressionable teenager... ;)

[Black Breathalizer]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
Back to Theoden's exorcism: in the book this is referred to several times after the event as Gandalf's act of healing or restoration. For this reason I'd always marked the event as being fairly dramatic and important. Not least of the reasons is that we have Gandalf clearly fulfilling his role in Middle-Earth as one who inspires people to greatness.

A low-key rendition of the scene would have failed to convey this. Excellent point, The Gaffer. In fact, Tolkien described the event in a dramatic way (which is why many lines used in this scene for the film are directly from the author.)

I find it shocking that some here never understood when they read the books that Gandalf's staff was used inside the Golden Hall to restore Theoden to his old self.

[Elfhelm]

Originally posted by The Gaffer
I think, and hope, that it's Merry. Though you couldn't blame Jackson for switching them just to annoy everyone. ;)

It is Merry. I just watched it again and they also show Pippin with Gandalf in a parallel scene.

I would have checked my books before I posted last night but they are all packed up. I'm moving this weekend.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Great Jerseydevil fanfiction. Show me in the book where Gandalf describes being led to the top of Orthanc.

It sure seems a tad hypocritical for jerseydevil and his Tolkien "Truth Squad" to be believe they're allowed to make assumptions based on the text but not Peter Jackson. Speaking of hypocritical...

Seems to me Sister Golden Hair ought to start practicing what she's preaching. Seems to me that you are still off topic. I only replied to already off topic remarks, that you, for one took there. I admitted I was off topic and I also attempted to get the thread back on topic. I suggest you do the same. Do not reply to my remarks here. If you wish to say anymore to me, I suggest a PM.

One more time: Everyone, and that includes myself, stay on topic. One more off topic post regarding anything other than Theoden in the movie, I will close this thread.

[hectorberlioz]

In my opinion, Bernard Hill(though he is a very good actor) was overacting as theoden.
"no parent should have to bury his child" :rolleyes:

[Artanis]

Originally posted by hectorberlioz
In my opinion, Bernard Hill(though he is a very good actor) was overacting as theoden.
"no parent should have to bury his child" :rolleyes: I liked that scene. :) As a parent I can well undestand Theoden's feelings.

[Melko Belcha]

Back to Theoden's exorcism, let's see what the book says.

TTT - The King of the Golden Hall
He raised his staff. There was a roll of thunder. The sunlight was blotted out from the eastern windows; the whole hall became suddenly dark as night. The fire faded to sullen embers. Only Gandalf could be seen, standing white and tall before the blackened hearth.
In the gloom they heard the hiss of Wormtongue's voice: 'Did I not counsel you, lord, to forbid his staff? That fool, Hama, has betrayed us!' There was a flash as if lightning had cloven the roof. Then all was silent. Wormtongue sprawled on his face.

'Now Theoden, son of Thengel, will you hearken to me?' said Gandalf. 'Do you ask for help?' He lifted his staff and pointed to a high window. There the darkness seemed to clear, and through the opening could be seen, high and far, a patch of shining sky. 'Not all is dark. Take courage, Lord of the Mark; for better help you will not find. No counsel have I to give to those that depair. Yet counsel I could give, and words I could speak to you. Will you hear them? They are not for all ears. I bid you come out before your doors and look abroad. Too long have you sat in shadows and trusted to twisted tales and crooked promptings.'
Slowly Theoden left his chair. A faint light grew in the hall again. The women hastened to the king's side, taking his arm, and with faltering steps the old man came down from the dais and paced softly through the hall. Wormtongue remained lying on the floor. They came to the doors and Gandalf knocked.

The scene in the film is so different then the scene in the book that I can't believe they are supposed to be a part of the same story. Gandalf does use magic in the Golden Hall, but all it really does is shut Grima up and makes Theoden listen to what Gandalf has to say. The scene in the film made me loose the human connection to Theoden, in the book it is his decision to listen to Gandalf, Gandalf used no force against Theoden, well maybe alittle fear, but Theoden gets up by his own will, he goes outside on his own will, with the help of Gandalf Theoden breaks the hold Grima has on him.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Artanis
I liked that scene. :) As a parent I can well undestand Theoden's feelings. I liked that part too. Very sad. I hate to see a grown man cry.

[hectorberlioz]

Sorry Artanis. That scene didnt belong in there. It was very out of place and over done.

[Elfhelm]

Regarding MB's post, it goes back to what I was saying about listening to cynical counselors. I think it is an important theme. Olorin moved quietly through the third age counselling leaders and giving them hope. I can't get to my Silmarillion right now, but I am sure this is a scene from LotR that bears out the nature of this Istari. Grima is the ultimate bad counselor. All lovers of medieval lit know about his type. Presented as "posession", the theme is simply not developed. Aragorn always listened to the right counselor. Faramir always did, too.

I still like the movies a lot, but I regret that this theme got lost.

[hectorberlioz]

Yes, too bad.
The problem with PJ is that he made the excorcism so "magical" when it wasnt intended(well... it wasnt supposed to be in there inthe first place) to be so magical. Gandalf doesnt fly, he doesnt make a blue power flame spring up out of his staff and kill a lot of people. He shuldnt excorcise people either.
ok, lets not get into the PJ thing again, sorry SGH. My post does have to do with theoden though, so dont close the thread.

[squinteyedsoutherner]

"Neither genuine hypnosis, nor variants, occur in my tale. Saruman's voice was not hypnotic but persuasive. Those who listened to him were not in danger of falling into a trance, but of agreeing with his arguments, while fully awake. It was always open to one to reject by free will and reason, both his voice while speaking and it's after impressions. Saruman corrupted the reasoning powers"

J.R.R. Tolkien
from a letter to Forrest J. Ackerman
#210

I think that covers posession. Tolkien's theme is how Saruman's words via Grima have "persuaded" Theoden.

[Sister Golden Hair]

sorry SGH. My post does have to do with theoden though, so dont close the thread. Your post is not completely off topic. Talking about Grima, who was the total influence over Theoden and comparing events related to it between book and movie is on topic.

One thing I wonder though about Grima in book and movie: how much power or influence did Saruman have over him? Was it in a way Saruman that was indirectly corrupting Theoden through Grima, or was it just Grima's own abilities?

[hectorberlioz]

Both, I think.

[Black Breathalizer]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
Seems to me that you are still off topic. I only replied to already off topic remarks, that you, for one took there. I admitted I was off topic and I also attempted to get the thread back on topic. I suggest you do the same. Do not reply to my remarks here. If you wish to say anymore to me, I suggest a PM. Sister Golden Hair wants it both ways. She wants the right to have the last off-topic word AND act like she's the mature, responsible administrator. If she was really interested in no more off topic discussions, she would have noticed my last post to this thread was about Theoden and let the whole stupid thing drop. But she couldn't resist one last off-topic jab at me. If she wants to be taken seriously as a "Queen Administrator", I suggest she find something better to do with her time than posting her research findings on the number of posts I have to the various forums here. :rolleyes:

Now that I've gotten Sister Golden Hair's off-topic response out of my system, this little peon poster will return to the topic:

Wormtongue was nothing more than a Saruman lackey. Gandalf made it clear in the books and the movies that Grima was beneath his concern. He was simply a flea he had to brush out of the way. So jerseydevil's notion that Gandalf needed his staff in order to dispense with Wormtongue is highly debateable.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Sister Golden Hair wants it both ways. She wants the right to have the last off-topic word AND act like she's the mature, responsible administrator. If she was really interested in no more off topic discussions, she would have noticed my last post to this thread was about Theoden and let the whole stupid thing drop. But she couldn't resist one last off-topic jab at me. If she wants to be taken seriously as a "Queen Administrator", I suggest she find something better to do with her time than posting her research findings on the number of posts I have to the various forums here.

Now that I've gotten Sister Golden Hair's off-topic response out of my system, this little peon poster will return to the topic: You just don't learn, do you? I suggest you go to GMs and read Entmoot's rules.

Closing.