Comments on: Thoughts on Return of the King http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/ A weblog for people who otherwise wouldn't. Fri, 05 Dec 2008 01:01:05 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: MOI http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-136 MOI Sat, 24 Jan 2004 06:38:25 +0000 http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-136 I was realy very disappointed when I saw third movie, because there wasn`t that wonderful part about Faramir and Eowyn. I was realy very disappointed when I saw third movie, because there wasn`t that wonderful part about Faramir and Eowyn.

]]> By: bandit http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-130 bandit Sat, 17 Jan 2004 00:03:40 +0000 http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-130 I was just disappointed Jackson did not explore Eowyn and faramir's "love story" as well as Eomer and Aragorn's friendship! and where was Imrahil???? I was just disappointed Jackson did not explore Eowyn and faramir’s “love story” as well as Eomer and Aragorn’s friendship! and where was Imrahil????

]]> By: Princess Clairey http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-128 Princess Clairey Thu, 08 Jan 2004 16:24:25 +0000 http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-128 It's true that Peter Jackson and everyone else involved with the Lord of the Rings movie project have done a brilliant job. A lot of Tolkien fans will say - like some of you have already mentioned - that Jackson shouldn't have changed anything and if he was a true fan he would've stuck strictly to the books blah blah blah . . . obviously some things had to be changed::- * The elf guy that hurried Frodo to Rivendell (is it Glorfindel?) is replaced with Arwen, and rightly so, due to the lack of female participation in The Fellowship of the Ring and because of Arwen's very small and static role despite her being one of the main characters' love interest. That's obviously only one example - Peter Jackson tells of why he changed things on the Extended DVDs. However, I was looking at the things that weren't really changed for any particular reason. I didn't find much to complain about in Fellowship or Two Towers, but with the Return of the King I was forever saying 'why?'. For example:- *At the very very end, why doesn't Sam meet Rosie and his kids back at Bag End? After all, that's where he lived. All Peter Jackson would've had to do was place the scene in front of Bag End as opposed to a random Shire house. *Why did Gollum have to do the 'throw away the food' trick to convince Frodo to leave Sam behind? It wouldn't have hurt to just do that part of the story according to the book. One thing I was bitterly disappointed about was the character of Faramir. The whole point of this character is that, when it all came down to it, he was the stronger brother. Yeah, everyone loved Boromir, but Boromir couldn't resist the ultimate temptation, could he? So all in all, the point was that if Denethor was to have a favourite son, it ought to have been Faramir, the one bloke (except Aragorn) who you thought "Yeah, this guy's great. He could actually resist the Ring! Doesn't that make you feel good about being a mortal man!" However, in the film he wants the Ring, just like everyone else. Boring. As well as this, in The Return of the King, his love story was missed out. Alas, I'll be able to see that in the Extended DVD version - yes, the Houses of Healing section's going to be in it, so anyone that buys it that hasn't read the books will actually notice that Faramir and Eowyn fall in love. And yes, the Scouring of the Shire is going to be in there too. I heard it from Christopher Lee's own lips. It’s true that Peter Jackson and everyone else involved with the Lord of the Rings movie project have done a brilliant job. A lot of Tolkien fans will say - like some of you have already mentioned - that Jackson shouldn’t have changed anything and if he was a true fan he would’ve stuck strictly to the books blah blah blah . . . obviously some things had to be changed::-

* The elf guy that hurried Frodo to Rivendell (is it Glorfindel?) is replaced with Arwen, and rightly so, due to the lack of female participation in The Fellowship of the Ring and because of Arwen’s very small and static role despite her being one of the main characters’ love interest.

That’s obviously only one example - Peter Jackson tells of why he changed things on the Extended DVDs.

However, I was looking at the things that weren’t really changed for any particular reason. I didn’t find much to complain about in Fellowship or Two Towers, but with the Return of the King I was forever saying ‘why?’. For example:-

*At the very very end, why doesn’t Sam meet Rosie and his kids back at Bag End? After all, that’s where he lived. All Peter Jackson would’ve had to do was place the scene in front of Bag End as opposed to a random Shire house.

*Why did Gollum have to do the ‘throw away the food’ trick to convince Frodo to leave Sam behind? It wouldn’t have hurt to just do that part of the story according to the book.

One thing I was bitterly disappointed about was the character of Faramir. The whole point of this character is that, when it all came down to it, he was the stronger brother. Yeah, everyone loved Boromir, but Boromir couldn’t resist the ultimate temptation, could he? So all in all, the point was that if Denethor was to have a favourite son, it ought to have been Faramir, the one bloke (except Aragorn) who you thought “Yeah, this guy’s great. He could actually resist the Ring! Doesn’t that make you feel good about being a mortal man!” However, in the film he wants the Ring, just like everyone else. Boring. As well as this, in The Return of the King, his love story was missed out.

Alas, I’ll be able to see that in the Extended DVD version - yes, the Houses of Healing section’s going to be in it, so anyone that buys it that hasn’t read the books will actually notice that Faramir and Eowyn fall in love. And yes, the Scouring of the Shire is going to be in there too. I heard it from Christopher Lee’s own lips.

]]> By: A LOTR Fan. http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-124 A LOTR Fan. Wed, 31 Dec 2003 15:25:52 +0000 http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-124 I liked the whole Trilogy set. I didn't like the first one that much, bcuz it wasn't really about getting to Mordor. It was more about the characters' personalities, where their backgrounds were from (eg. Legolas, an Elf from Rivendell) Sorry if that's incorrect. I haven't really read much from the books, just the good parts. The Two Towers was great! The Ents were awesome, the acting of anger, romance, and pain was wonderful in my opinion. Some people seem to think that if you haven't read the books, then you don't understand why the missing cuts are so important, and therefore, you can't defend the "bad" parts of the movie. That's not true. Even if you are not a MAJOR Tolkien fan, haven't read the books at least twice, or haven't read them at all, I still think you are allowed to have your say. But there are some people who will not change their minds. They WANT things to complain about. Nothing pleases them. In their eyes, directors must be PERFECT, so the movie must be PERFECT. And I'm not just talking about Lord Of The Rings. But anyways, I'll continue with my comments for ROTK. ROTK was an incredibly AWESOME movie. They cut out a few scenes, which would have been nice to see, but unlike SOME CERTAIN PEOPLE, I will not say the whole film was a waste or that it was ruined bcuz of one scene. The last 10 mins was touching. All in all, it was a GREAT trilogy. I liked the whole Trilogy set. I didn’t like the first one that much, bcuz it wasn’t really about getting to Mordor. It was more about the characters’ personalities, where their backgrounds were from (eg. Legolas, an Elf from Rivendell) Sorry if that’s incorrect. I haven’t really read much from the books, just the good parts. The Two Towers was great! The Ents were awesome, the acting of anger, romance, and pain was wonderful in my opinion. Some people seem to think that if you haven’t read the books, then you don’t understand why the missing cuts are so important, and therefore, you can’t defend the “bad” parts of the movie. That’s not true. Even if you are not a MAJOR Tolkien fan, haven’t read the books at least twice, or haven’t read them at all, I still think you are allowed to have your say. But there are some people who will not change their minds. They WANT things to complain about. Nothing pleases them. In their eyes, directors must be PERFECT, so the movie must be PERFECT. And I’m not just talking about Lord Of The Rings. But anyways, I’ll continue with my comments for ROTK.
ROTK was an incredibly AWESOME movie. They cut out a few scenes, which would have been nice to see, but unlike SOME CERTAIN PEOPLE, I will not say the whole film was a waste or that it was ruined bcuz of one scene. The last 10 mins was touching. All in all, it was a GREAT trilogy.

]]> By: Ballyclogh http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-123 Ballyclogh Sat, 27 Dec 2003 16:02:16 +0000 http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-123 A Triumphant End to a Magnificent Trilogy...yes, I have read "LOTR", "The Hobbit", "The Simarillion" and Tolkien's various letters on the Subjects of Middle Earth MANY times and, in all honesty, I was not disappointed with the Trilogy in the Least. Yes, things were changed and/or left out but what Peter Jackson did with such a monumental work was stupendous. What was left out or changed was to better emphasize the storyline from beginning to end...was Tom Bombadil that pertinent to the Destruction of the Ring? No...More insight into the Entwives? absolutely not. Yes, I did miss horribly the Scouring of the Shire and the Knowledge that it wasn't even filmed...but unfortunately it has nothing to do with the destruction of the ring...it's just a very cool sidestory. I can go on with what was changed and what was left out but that will take an Age!...what is important is that Peter Jackson brought a story to life when no one else dared to even Tackle it...and the cinematic achievements brought about a whole new love of the stories and the world which Tolkien gave birth to. For me, the story of the Ring and it's fate as it was so beautifully wrought by Jackson and Company is a testament to Tolkien's imagination and the impact this epic tale has had on the world. I must be one of the Only Tolkienphiles who truly didn't care about what was slightly changed or Left out...simply that the story of the Fellowship and the War of the Ring and it's eventual destruction was crafted with an extraordinary beauty and in a tradition that, I believe, Tolkien himself would have been Proud of. A Triumphant End to a Magnificent Trilogy…yes, I have read “LOTR”, “The Hobbit”, “The Simarillion” and Tolkien’s various letters on the Subjects of Middle Earth MANY times and, in all honesty, I was not disappointed with the Trilogy in the Least. Yes, things were changed and/or left out but what Peter Jackson did with such a monumental work was stupendous. What was left out or changed was to better emphasize the storyline from beginning to end…was Tom Bombadil that pertinent to the Destruction of the Ring? No…More insight into the Entwives? absolutely not. Yes, I did miss horribly the Scouring of the Shire and the Knowledge that it wasn’t even filmed…but unfortunately it has nothing to do with the destruction of the ring…it’s just a very cool sidestory. I can go on with what was changed and what was left out but that will take an Age!…what is important is that Peter Jackson brought a story to life when no one else dared to even Tackle it…and the cinematic achievements brought about a whole new love of the stories and the world which Tolkien gave birth to. For me, the story of the Ring and it’s fate as it was so beautifully wrought by Jackson and Company is a testament to Tolkien’s imagination and the impact this epic tale has had on the world. I must be one of the Only Tolkienphiles who truly didn’t care about what was slightly changed or Left out…simply that the story of the Fellowship and the War of the Ring and it’s eventual destruction was crafted with an extraordinary beauty and in a tradition that, I believe, Tolkien himself would have been Proud of.

]]> By: name http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-119 name Tue, 23 Dec 2003 12:16:04 +0000 http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-119 I gave up worrying about what they left out of the movie a long time ago. I just figure this is the best it will ever get on screen and if I want the real thing I gotta read the book again. I really hated that whole love triangle between Arwen, Aragorn, and Eowyn. They really blew it out of proportion. I gave up worrying about what they left out of the movie a long time ago. I just figure this is the best it will ever get on screen and if I want the real thing I gotta read the book again. I really hated that whole love triangle between Arwen, Aragorn, and Eowyn. They really blew it out of proportion.

]]> By: keir morse http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-118 keir morse Sun, 21 Dec 2003 10:33:14 +0000 http://www.crazybutable.com/weblog/archives/2003/12/20/thoughts-on-return-of-the-king/#comment-118 GRAET? GRAET?

]]>