Mostly there are references to the lidless eye and his malicious will, which is like a palpaple force, but nothing physical. There are some phrases, though, that talk about Sauron taking form again, or taking shape again, something of that nature, which could probably be interpreted as a reference to a physical body but I think that would be a bit of stretch.
LotR: RotK question
- Thread starter EJA
- Start date
Mostly there are references to the lidless eye and his malicious will, which is like a palpaple force, but nothing physical. There are some phrases, though, that talk about Sauron taking form again, or taking shape again, something of that nature, which could probably be interpreted as a reference to a physical body but I think that would be a bit of stretch.
S
Stone_Cold_Sisko
Guest
I think it's interesting how many of Peter Jackson's "additions" ended up being scaled back to the original book's idea as time went on. Arwen in Helm's Deep, Sauron fighting, I vaguely remember a few more instances.
Just goes to show how strong the original novels' narrative really is. For the most part Tolkien knew what he was doing. The whole "we know better for film" impulse was shown wrong many times.
Had the filming gone on even longer, I suspect even more of the changes would have been scaled back to the original book's ideas.
Just goes to show how strong the original novels' narrative really is. For the most part Tolkien knew what he was doing. The whole "we know better for film" impulse was shown wrong many times.
Had the filming gone on even longer, I suspect even more of the changes would have been scaled back to the original book's ideas.
The only really good decision was to leave out Tom Bombadil, in my opinion. Everything else... I don't know. Fellowship was fine, but with Two Towers it started to get a bit annoying. Aragorn falling from the cliff, for instance. Why the hell? Changing Faramir. What the fuck? They totally destroyed the actual point about Faramir's character with that. I found myself eyerolling at the sight of Elves at Helm's Deep. And upset when they removed the Rangers from Return of the King.
And the whole Anduril storyline was a miss, too. It was far more awesome in the books.
And the whole Anduril storyline was a miss, too. It was far more awesome in the books.
Personally I would have loved if Aragorn fought Sauron at the end of the movie. It would have bookended the opening of FOTR. And it would have been bad-ass. We already know that Sauron had a physical body in the books; Gollum talks about him only having four fingers on his black hand.
And I would have loved if Arwen led the rescue at Helm's Deep. It would have given her character a purpose to be in the movie.
And I would have loved if Arwen led the rescue at Helm's Deep. It would have given her character a purpose to be in the movie.
They did hint at it with the line,"Do you think the eyes of the White Tower are blind, Mithrandir?"
Or something to that effect.
I think that's a given seeing as he's in The Hobbit.
Which they better hurry up with because Christopher Lee isn't getting any younger.
Two weeks into filming the battle of Helm's Deep (which was three months of the shoot), Jackson decided that, no, having Arwen there didn't really work. I'm not clear on why Jackson thought it was a good idea to start with.
There's actually not that much footage of Liv Tyler at Helm's Deep that was lost. A little of it can be seen in the film; her black hair can be seen on one of the horseriders charging into the Orc lines at the gate at dawn on the fifth day.
One interesting side effect is that The Two Towers has the most obvious reshoot footage in the trilogy. There are scenes where Miranda Otto and Liv Tyler look vastly different, because the scenes were reshot (or, in some cases, shot for the first time) two years after the bulk of principle photography. (The notable one is the scene with Arwen in the middle of The Two Towers where her face really looks like it's exploded. But there's also a scene of Eowyn in which her hair color is vastly different from moments before and her face has suddenly grown more wrinkly.)
I think, at most, we'll see Sir Christopher Lee for all of one scene, perhaps only with McKellan and McCoy, and it will be done second unit in the UK. (Lee has said that he's too old and frail to fly to New Zealand.)
Last edited:
I didn't know Christopher Lee was pushing 90. Wow.
Not really. What they did was actually give him a character arc, which he didn't really have in the book when he rejected the Ring outright. He's still a good guy, it just took him a little longer to realize it himself. He wasn't trying to take the Ring to Minas Tirith for personal glory, as Boromir would have done, but to simply redeem himself in the eyes of his father, which he eventually sadly discovered was impossible to do. His line "A chance for Faramir, captain of Gondor, to show his quality" resonates a whole lot more in the EE as it echoes Denethor's line to him in the flashback. Overall, the tragic Faramir/Denethor relationship is one of my favorite things in the ROTK film (although yeah, I wish they would've done a less crazed portrayal of Denethor.)
He could still totally kick Chuck Norris' arse.
It wouldn't have fit the style of the previous movies. Assuming Sauron is essentially Super-Saruman, in terms of decision making, Sauron would not be one to march out with his armies and would send his minions to do everything for him. It says in the opening prologue of FOTR (maybe not in the original, but it was in the extended version) that the Elves and Men were within an inch of winning before Sauron himself emerged to his first defeat.
Also, I feel it would have weakened the idea of Sauron being this omnipotent being of pure malice that he would resort to purely physical means of defeating his enemies. If Saruman had traveled all the way to Caradhras and tried to chop Frodo into little pieces, instead of causing an avalanche, wouldn't that have been somewhat cheap?
It was Sauron's moment of final victory, though. The Battle of Pelannor Fields ended in essentially a draw and his enemies foolishly marched to his very Black Gates, surrounded a hundred to one. Why not head out for a little personal payback?
I forget, at that point in the story, is Sauron aware that the Ring is in play? He senses someone using it, right? Wasn't the ploy to make him think that Aragorn had the Ring and would wear it at the Gates for his final triumph?
I forget, at that point in the story, is Sauron aware that the Ring is in play? He senses someone using it, right? Wasn't the ploy to make him think that Aragorn had the Ring and would wear it at the Gates for his final triumph?
Wow! I didn't realize how old he was either. I thought that he was one of the bright spots of Star Wars Episode II and, to a lesser extent, Episode III, brief as his screen time may have been. Say what you about the Star Wars PT but Lucas made an excellent decision to cast Lee as Count Dooku. Having managed to avoid most of the spoilers about AOTC, I had NO idea that he would wind up being part of the Star Wars franchise along with LOTR. I hope he is doing o.k. Why is Jackson including him (Saruman) in Hobbit? I know Gandalf was out battling the necromancer(?) during the time he was away from Bilbo and the Dwarves (who was his travel agent?) but his scenes were only mentioned briefly and given little description in the book if I recall correctly. I assume that this is more "padding" to give the Hobbit two movies instead of the one that it needs IMHO, right?
Well, despite the quirky and rather staid sensibility of its author, the LotR is a masterful narrative. The way Sauron is handled is one example of that: always in the background, always looming, never physically present, with even his servants and emissaries appearing as terrifying and overwhelmingly powerful.
So, yeah, having Sauron appear in physical combat would certainly have lessened his stature, but it is the kind of temptation that a director of Jackson's quite literal sensibilities would be likely to succomb to. (He does in fact succomb to it, at the beginning of Fellowship, but that is less of an issue because it is a flashback to a previous era. I've always found Sauron's appearance in these scenes to be rather ridiculous, though, in any event.)
For this reason, I think it was certainly the right choice to remove Sauron's battle with Aragorn, though Sauron is far more effective in the books than in the movies anyway, for a variety of reasons.
One is that we learn more about him in the books (and more about his servants such as the Nazgul and the Witch King). Another is the red-eye radar in RotK which is an effort to capture the power of Sauron's gaze on a weakening Frodo, but which comes across as rather silly. Blatantly so, actually, I remember laughter breaking out in the theater when I originally saw this, which was certainly not the desired effect. Again, too literal. That's the weakness of Jackson's adaptations overall, I would say, though that same quality doubtless contributed to their success.
Last edited:
Not only that, it's just awful storytelling to start the third chapter of an epic adventure trilogy with a big victory when your heroes have achieved two great successes immediately beforehand, at the end of the second part (Helm's Deep rescued and Isengard subdued). I love the Scouring of the Shire, but I agree with PJ that it just wouldn't have worked in his adaptation. The best option, then, is to follow the theatricals, and allow Saruman's character to gracefully fade away.
I think perhaps his biggest mistake in the trilogy was to give Aragorn the choice of freeing the ghost army from its bonds, thereby suggesting that if he'd been a minor dick by keeping them around for a few hours, they could have wiped out all of Mordor and everyone could have gotten to bed early, sipping nice hot cups of tea. The ghosts should have dissipated of their own volition after clearing the orcish forces that were on the battlefield at that moment only.
Well the 'ghost' army element is certainly problematic - in both the film and source material.
IMO it just didn't fit the relatively well grounded fantasy rules that had been established in FOTR, TTT, & half of ROTK for Tolkien to suddenly introduce a 'army of the dead'. I certainly think that was Tolkien's worst idea. I would have excluded the army of the dead if I adapted LOTR.
IMO it just didn't fit the relatively well grounded fantasy rules that had been established in FOTR, TTT, & half of ROTK for Tolkien to suddenly introduce a 'army of the dead'. I certainly think that was Tolkien's worst idea. I would have excluded the army of the dead if I adapted LOTR.
We know that spirits of the dead can remain among the living from very early on in the LotR (for example the encounter with the spectre in the chapter "Fog on the Barrowdowns" early in Fellowship), not to mention that the ringwraiths themselves are ghosts of a kind, bound to an object the way the army of the dead is bound to the Stone of Erech (sp?). So, I think there is plenty of precedent for it in the earlier novels.
Moreover, Tolkien draws on pre-existing folklore and mythology where the hero journeying to the realm of the dead or confronting the ghosts of the past as part of his maturation process is a common trope. Aragorn is completing the unfinished business of his ancestors and reconnecting with his ancient heritage. Aeneas visits hell (to speak to his father) before he can found Rome, for example, and Ulysses has a similar experience on his voyage home from Troy.
Thematically, it is an important part of Aragorn's journey as Isildur's heir, along with his taking control of the Palantir and demonstrating his healing prowess after the battle. It's a test of his will to lead and his legitimacy as ruler of Gondor. Overall, Aragorn's maturation is one of the film trilogy's main weaknesses imo. Mortensen works pretty well as Strider but we never see the dynamic leader emerge as we do in the books (too many of the above "trials" are downplayed or clumsily handled).
That said, I actually think the initial encounter with the ghost army in the Paths of the Dead works pretty well in the film, but having Aragorn bring the army all the way to Minas Tirith was a mistake. In the book, Tolkien is wise enough to keep the ghost army on the edge of the main narrative and doesn't allow its arrival to resolve the climactic Battle of the Pelennor Fields. You only hear about it later, and the role of the ghost army is limited to Aragorn commandeering the ships bringing reinforcements from the mouth of the river.
This works better because it allows the incident to make its contribution to Aragorn's growth, while allowing the climactic battle to be resolved primarily by the main characters' actions, rather than by the more fantastical element of the ghost army (as in the movie).
Last edited:
Maybe I'm remembering the books wrong, but if I recall correctly, there was no storyline. When they left Rivendell, he just announced he had a new sword that was forged from Isildur's blade. In the movies I really liked how it represented a throne he was to frightened to take.
Similar threads
