I've never read LOTR. Will I like the movie(s)?

[Grey]

The books have Gandalf riding to gather the army that collapsed at the Fords of Isen and find Erkenbrand. Movie Gandalf rides to find Eomer and his men.

Now I can’t remember the movie, but in the books Gandalf also rides to Isenguard to get a small army of Hurons from Treebeard to help at the Hornburg. The orc host is then caught between 2 human armies (elves never marched to Helm’s Deep to help) and a wood that effectively obliterates the orcs.

Sam’s treatment of Gollum is completely understandable. Gollum is a treacherous, vile thug who when first possessing the ring used it to spy and pry sowing enough discord in his village that his grandmother had to exile him. Smeagol has to be roped. Otherwise he can escape and either throttle Frodo and Sam or alert the orc patrols of Mordor. It’s only when Frodo exerts his will on Smeagol using the ring that he becomes less dangerous.

And Elrond’s requirement for Arwen’s hand (it’s not a curse) is that no lesser man than the King of the Re-united Realms or Arnor and Gondor will possess her. That hasn’t happened since Isildur died. But to Elrond his daughter is trading in eternal life and permanent separation from her kin for fleeting joy. It’s not something to be entered into lightly.

[Grey]

Oh and what’s the motivation for Sauron and Sauruman? It’s a bit mixed. Sauron seems to favour order through the domination of lesser wills and since he’s effectively a demi-god he tends to win. But for Tolkien the domination of a will is an evil act as it removes the victim’s right or ability to choose its own destiny. Sauron though is further corrupted through his association with Morgoth the demiurgic power of annihilation from the earlier ages of middle earth. Morgoth sought the domination of elves and men and their corruption by trying to impose himself as GOD, not just a god. Sauron fancies setting himself up as a god-king in Middle Earth as well and again since he has direct knowledge of the actual GOD his usurpation is also evil.

Sauruman, is basically cut from the same cloth as Sauron with a mind of mechanism and order. He’s fallen and can no longer see the value in letting the chaotic choices of mortals and elves work themselves out. He wants to become a power and order things as he wants.

[TWDuke]

Clearly I spaced out in listening to Faramir’s dialogue regarding how he knew of Boromir’s death. I was probably distracted by the pretty. Funnily enough, he and Sean Bean are the only men I find remotely attractive in this film, so it’s amusing that they play brothers.

It’s not to surprising that if you found one attractive you’d also find the other one attractive, if you think about it.

I found it almost painful to watch the scene where Sam is pulling the rope attached to Gollum/Smeagol (does it matter which one I call him? He seems to prefer Smeagol, so that’s what I’ve been calling him, mentally, although the Gollum name is certainly more famous). Sam just seemed horribly cruel.

Sam’s a good guy, but a little simple. He can divide the world into two factions (a) good and (b) evil. Or even better (1) Frodo’s friends and (2) Frodo’s enemies. So Gollum, being a b2, deserves rough treatment. (Hey, there’s a character flaw for Sam!) Frodo sees a bigger picture, but it wasn’t always that way - remember when Gandalf lectured him in the mines about dealing out judgment.

Also when he was being dragged around by Faramir and screamed at while Smeagol seemed to be in utter agony, both mental and physical, throughout most of the film.

Of course, Gollum’s a bit of a drama queen.

Is the fact of dad being willing to kill his own son external knowledge (to the films) or did I miss yet another bit of backstory while I was Ogling The Pretty? Because for a guy who’s just lost one son to be willing to kill another just for letting go a prisoner on his own discretion seems … quite astonishingly low.

Wait until you meet this guy.

:eek: That is … harsh. (I take it that particular combo is an unusual one and Elrond didn’t/doesn’t expect him to gain access to both.) I don’t understand, though. Wouldn’t Elrond prefer that Aragorn find someone else rather than keep mooning around Arwen? Or is Elrond just determined to keep Aragorn from having sex with Arwen? Because that seems rather short-sighted.

Elrond is not putting some kind of curse on Aragorn. In Tolkien’s world, that would be (a) out of character, (b) evil (see Grey’s comment above), and (c) probably beyond Elrond’s power. Elrond is merely stating a fact, as those with foresight are wont to do.

Although book Elrond grieves over the idea of eternal separation from Arwen, he does not actively seek to stop her from exercising her free will.

I did NOT envy DM and EW having to emote their way through those mawkish lines. Still, if Jackson was inventing whole minor subplots (Faramir’s interest in the Ring), he sure as heck could’ve nipped that lovefest in the bud.

If you ask me, less emoting would have made it a far better scene.

@Qadgop_the_Mercotan

But Arwen (at that point anyway) was of elven kind. And they only have sex in order to get pregnant, and only within the confines of marriage.

They only have sex within marriage because sex is marriage.

“It was the act of bodily union that achieved marriage…it was at all times lawful for any of the Eldar, both being unwed, to marry thus of free consent one to the other without ceremony or witness…in flight and exile and wandering, such marriages were often made.” (Laws and Customs of the Eldar)

[Grey]

There’s another aspect of the Aragon/Elrond dynamic the movies don’t do well. Elrond has basically raised Aragon as his foster father. He deeply loves him, but is gravely concerned by the challenges and threats he sees that Aragon will face. Elrond sees that Sauron is rising in might and unless he is stopped Aragon and the rest of the free peoples of the west will be hunted down and reduced to serfdom. Aragon, his foster son, then must either triumph or die. If Aragon is to succeed he must refuse anything that binds him to another, he must be able to wander through the west and serve with the Lords of the Mark and the armies of the Stewards. He must be free to go to the south and learn of the peoples dominated by Sauron. He must be able to wander homeless and friendless across middle earth so he will be ready for the challenge when it inevitably comes.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Here’s what I don’t get… where’s the counter-Sauron? In most fantasy fiction there’d be a balancing force of unlimited good serving as Sauron’s counterpart.

[well_he_s_back]

Hi guys. Joining in the fun a little late. Glad you liked the movie, Choie! I’d still vote for saving any “how-tos” and “behind the scenes” featurettes til after you see the 3rd movie. Just my two cents.

Most of your questions have been answered, but here are some general thoughts: Tolkien has been criticized often for having one-dimensional characters. I think that’s valid for some of his characters, but not others. It’s a large cast of characters, after all. Frodo, Gollum, Boromir, Eowyn and others are far more multi-dimensional than anybody in Harry Potter or Narnia. Just my humble opinion, of course.
Yes, the bad guys are one-dimensional. But I think that’s because the story is about how the “good guys” react to temptation, to evil, and to danger. It’s not about the bad guys.
Also, the whole section with the ents is much more powerful and moving in the book. I can’t say Jackson completlly failed with the ents, but it certainly wasn’t his finest hour.
Hope this made some sense, and looking forward to your response to ROTK!

[Grey]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Here’s what I don’t get… where’s the counter-Sauron? In most fantasy fiction there’d be a balancing force of unlimited good serving as Sauron’s counterpart.

Gandalf plays that role to a small extent but really there is no comparable force for good in Middle Earth. The innate nature of the free people and of the world itself is good, since it was tainted after it’s creation so that is in some ways another aspect. But really Sauron’s opposite is Manwe though Manwe dwarfs Sauron much as Sauron dwarfs Sauruman. The problem is if you bring out Manwe what possible outcome could you have but victory for good? No, Tolkien had the Valar, through their impact on the shaping of the world and their innate nature, withdraw from active engagement with Middle Earth and its people. Instead you have them set up an almost covert operation of sending over agents (the wizards) with a restricted power set to encourage the free people to deal with Sauron on their own.

[TWDuke]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Here’s what I don’t get… where’s the counter-Sauron? In most fantasy fiction there’d be a balancing force of unlimited good serving as Sauron’s counterpart.

There is a greater will that guides events, such as the Ring finding its way to Frodo (referenced in the first book/movie), but it’s still up to the little people to do the legwork.

Sauron is evil because he strives to impose his will on Middle-earth and take away the ability of men (and elves and dwarves and hobbits) to choose their own destiny. An equally powerful being that met him force for force, strategem for strategem, would wind up becoming like him. That’s what the Ring symbolizes.

[well_he_s_back]

ReallyNotAllThatBright had a very good question. Grey & TWDuke - those were very good answers. Here are my additional thoughts: Enslaving others is one of the most evil things in Tolkien’s world. Very good point. Also important to remember that LOTR is a very “Catholic” work at its bedrock. People have free will and they are the agents of God in the world to counteract evil. As Gandalf says, we can’t choose the times we are given; we can choose how we live in them. As I said before, the books are about the good guys, not the bad guys. Tolkien was one of the few writers who thought good was actually more interesting than evil.

[jsc1953]

@choie

Oh my. I didn’t catch at all that Saruman’s not in Mordor itself!!! I am quite staggeringly dumb. All this time I thought he was hanging out in Mordor, and the Orcs were just coming from Isengard. So this makes Frodo/Sam’s journey make a little more sense, in that they’re not trooping out to meet Saruman. I suppose we have no idea – until ROTK – what’s waiting for our fair hobbits in Mordor, then? Or did I miss that too?

Readers of the books had the benefit of a nice big map in the frontispiece. But fear not – the very same map makes a cameo appearance in TTT. It’s in the scene with Faramir and his staff…somebody unrolls a map and makes a reference to what Saruman’s up to…and meanwhile, over here in Mordor…(entirely for the benefit of confused viewers, I’m sure). So put the DVD back in, and press pause at the proper moment, and you can sort it all out.

[Rachael_Rage]

@choie

I felt like a very bad audience member, not being captivated by the trees. I had the sense that Jackson wouldn’t have included it if weren’t quite important, so it seemed like an obligation to enjoy it. Though yes, Chronos, I do remember getting a kick out of the Ents admitting that they’re decidedly slow of speech! Still: that is rarely interesting to watch. Reading is a whole 'nother story.

It’s been a while since I’ve watched TTT, but as I recall I found the theatrical version to be rather tedious, largely due to what seemed like endless footage of big trees plodding about. Oddly enough I found the extended edition (Bonus! More Ents!) much more fascinating and ended up being my favorite of the three parts. I can’t remember exactly what they did to make more Ents = interesting Ents in the longer version, but I would highly recommend it. Of course reading the book helps (how awesome is Tom Bombadil?), too, but I am pretty sure I saw the Extended version before I read the book so the film itself is improved greatly by the longer cut, to the extent I was pretty angry that I saw what amounted to an extended preview in theaters and had to wait a year for the “real” version on DVD. The extended FOTR is fine - mostly just adding more detail and back-story - but not really essential viewing (totally worth it if you have any desire though) and I don’t even remember the extended ROTK since I thought the theatrical one was endless (GOOD endless, but still…). By contrast the plus-size TTT is IMO lots stronger in character development than the theatrical version, and overall just a better film. Limiting yourself to the theatrical version of TTT is doing yourself and the story a disservice. Of course, YMMV.

@choie

(does it matter which one I call him? He seems to prefer Smeagol, so that’s what I’ve been calling him, mentally, although the Gollum name is certainly more famous).

This gets touched on a bit in ROTK.

[BigT]

@Rachael Rage

Quote:
Originally Posted by choie
(does it matter which one I call him? He seems to prefer Smeagol, so that’s what I’ve been calling him, mentally, although the Gollum name is certainly more famous).
This gets touched on a bit in ROTK.

Glad you said that. I was about to explain that, but I forgot the explanation is in ROTK, so I wouldn’t have spoilered it. Anyways,

Smeagol was his old name (and personality) before he got the ring, but Gollum is his name after it corrupts him. After he loses the ring again, both personalities seem to emerge at different times, like in the ending (of TTT). Gollum eventually takes over the “good” Smeagol completely.

Suffice it to say there’s a reason one name is more popular than the other.

[Malacandra]

@Grey

The books have Gandalf riding to gather the army that collapsed at the Fords of Isen and find Erkenbrand. Movie Gandalf rides to find Eomer and his men.

Now I can’t remember the movie, but in the books Gandalf also rides to Isenguard to get a small army of Hurons from Treebeard to help at the Hornburg.

Whatever the controversy over Elves at Helm’s Deep, it’s nothing to the flak Jackson would have caught if he’d had a bunch of Canadian Indians show up.

[Grey]

I would’ve paid good money to see how some fans would’ve reacted had the movie previews mentioned that.

I meant huorns of course.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

@TWDuke

…Sauron is evil because he strives to impose his will on Middle-earth and take away the ability of men (and elves and dwarves and hobbits) to choose their own destiny. An equally powerful being that met him force for force, strategem for strategem, would wind up becoming like him. That’s what the Ring symbolizes.

Remember, too, that the last time the Valar (Tolkien’s demigods or angels, more or less) directly confronted the Lucifer-like Morgoth, for whom Sauron was chief lieutenant, the land was almost laid waste, and many, many people died. The Valar don’t want a repeat of that by taking on Sauron toe-to-toe, so they sent the Wizards (Saruman and Gandalf among them) to buck up the will of the Free Peoples and to strive against evil less flashily… and catastrophically.

[jsc1953]

@choie

I … have no idea what you’re implying, but I suspect my comments about “her” not being an Earth Mother were a bit of an understatement. Coolio.

I was attempting to indicate stifled snickering and much biting of tongue.

[Reno_Nevada]

@Chronos

I’m not sure whether I’m more puzzled by why I never noticed that, or by why Elros’ children weren’t given the choice, while Elrond’s were.

I hope that this is not thrashed out in the SECOND couple of hundred postings on this thread…but the important thing to note here is that Elrond made THE WRONG CHOICE, while Elros made THE RIGHT CHOICE…according to the Gods and authorial fiat, anyway. Elros chose to accept “The Gift of Illuvatar”, accept mortality and an immortal soul, and exist past the end of the world. Elrond went with bodily immortality and a tie to the world. The Gods did not bind Elrond’s children to his mistake, but did not let Elros’ children reverse their forebear’s correct choice.

As I interpret things, anyway.

[kenobi_65]

@choie

Oh my. I didn’t catch at all that Saruman’s not in Mordor itself!!! I am quite staggeringly dumb. All this time I thought he was hanging out in Mordor, and the Orcs were just coming from Isengard. So this makes Frodo/Sam’s journey make a little more sense, in that they’re not trooping out to meet Saruman.

You could use a map; one of the advantages to reading the books is being able to refer to the maps in the front of each book.

I don’t think it’s particularly spoiler-y to look at a map, such as this:
http://www.ititches.com/middleearth/

A general description of the “trip so far”, through the end of the second movie:

The Shire is in the northwestern part of Middle-Earth; Mordor is in the southeastern portion (well, there’s more stuff to the south and east, but it’s in the southeastern corner of Tolkien’s maps!).

Frodo and co. headed roughly due east from the Shire to Rivendell. From there, the Fellowship headed generally south (and a little more east), through Moria, then to Lorien, then they began heading down the River Anduin.

Upon the “breaking of the Fellowship” at Amon Hen, Saruman’s orcs took Merry and Pippin in a generally western direction, heading towards Isengard, which is even further west. The orcs were waylaid by Eomer’s men on the southern edge of Fangorn Forest.

Meanwhile, Frodo and Sam crossed over to the east bank of the river, and continued southeast towards the Black Gate of Mordor (which is located at the far NW corner of Mordor). After that, they skirted around Mordor, heading a bit west, then south through North Ithilien, until they came upon Faramir, near Osgiliath. After Faramir set them free, Frodo, Sam, and Gollum began heading east once again, towards the “other way in” to Mordor.

Other notes:
Gondor is directly west of Mordor. Rohan is to the north and west of Gondor, and Isengard is on the northwestern corner of Rohan.

Hope this helps!

[Airk]

I’m going to second the recommendation that choie check out the extended Two Towers. I agree that it adds a lot more “value” than extended Fellowship.

Fellowship was my favorite film overall.
TTT improved the most going from Theatrical to Extended
RotK was the best theatrical version (also, least improved Extended edition. Certain bits that went back in really should not have.)

Also to hit some highlights:

Gandalf is awesome.

Andy Serkis and the special effects team did mega good work with Gollum/Smeagol.

Sauruman (and Sauron, really) is fairly complex in his motivations, really, but the book (and therefore the films) is not -about- him, so it’s not really gone into. Suffice to say that, yes, he/they want to rule the world. The…er…excessive slaughter is a problem with the film.

Similarly, some complexity in the “Good guys” is lost in the film, but this -is- intended to be a Myth, not some work of gritty modern fiction with conflicted heroes who debate whether they should save the world when they’d rather be off banging elf chicks or something.

Eowyn falls for Book Aragorn because, basically, he glows with an aura of kingly awesome. No, really, I’m not making this up, though it’s not quite literally glowing. He really -does-, when he lets himself, carry about himself a sense of “I am one of the Kings of Numenor, and that makes me a badass.” This is rather absent from film Aragorn. Anyway, it’s really just a crush, and she gets over it.

The scene with Sam and Frodo discussing tales and things is from the book (RotK technically, I believe), but doesn’t happen in the same place as it does in the film since, er, the place it happens in the film isn’t in the books at all. (I mean, Osgiliath does -exist- in the books, but Frodo and Sam never go there.) I did find it a little bit too weepy, but I was too busy being cranky at Jackson’s rendition of Faramir to care. Smeagol’s reaction to that scene, at least, is really moving.

#1: The whole deal with Faramir makes no sense to me in the movie, so I will not attempt to explain it. Though “how does Faramir know Boromir is dead” is in fact answered in the extended edition. He sees the boat with Boromir in it.

#2: It’s The Law. Faramir, as a captain of Gondor, will forfeit his life if he chooses a course that proves ill for the city he is sworn to defend.

#3: I think the extended edition does a bit of a better job of indicating that it’s Eomer’s folks who clobber the orcs who had Merry & Pippin captive. There were, as mentioned, a few casualties.

#7: This is another bit that really doesn’t make sense in the film, because you’re not really given any indication of what all the situation is in Rohan. But they’ve been fighting a war with Sauruman for months, and have a lot of men in the field. They recently suffered a defeat that left a lot of those troops scattered all over the place. Also, what really defeats the orcs is the “OMGWTFWE’RESURROUNDEDBYEVILTREES!RUNAWAY!” factor, not the rescuing army, which would, honestly, have had a serious hard time otherwise.

[kenobi_65]

@Airk

#2: It’s The Law. Faramir, as a captain of Gondor, will forfeit his life if he chooses a course that proves ill for the city he is sworn to defend.

And, the One Ring is a known quantity to the rulers of Gondor. It was taken from Sauron by Isildur, the king of Gondor, and kept by him until it treacherously slipped off his finger.

Recall that Boromir knew of it (during the Council of Elrond), and counseled that it be used to fight Sauron. Safe to say that Denethor knows of it, too, and would similiarly consider it to be a desireable item.