LOTR:ROTK How many of you still don't know the story ending?

Cafe Society
21

You know, that’s what I thought too. I’d never been into fantasy or dungeons and dragons and princesses and elves and whatnot. I grew up preferring (still prefer) non-fiction, especially biographies (I think I’d love your books, I just have to get off my ass and buy them). I never went through any kind of phase that would take me anywhere near LOTR.

I was at the theater opening night, 2 years ago, for one reason only. I was a big Peter Jackson fan. I would have been there no matter what movie it was, because he was directing. Up until the time the lights went down, I had ZERO interest in LOTR. I didn’t even know what the story was, and had only vaguely heard of a few of the character’s names.

Within the first 2 minutes, I was so hooked that you couldn’t have pried me out of my chair. I fell utterly and completely in love with what was unfolding in front of me. I question the sanity of anyone who says they were bored, but only because I was on the edge of my seat, not wanting to blink for fear of missing something, since I didn’t know the story and had no idea what was going to happen next. I was enthralled. In the space of a few minutes I went from having zero interest in Middle-Earth to being deeply involved with the characters and just marveling at the world as it appeared on screen.

I told someone once that I think the reason it got into me so much, me being a non-fiction nerd, was because the way Tolkien wrote, and the way Jackson filmed, was starting with the notion that THESE EVENTS HAPPENED. They went with the idea that this was a real history, events that took place thousands of years ago. It’s practically a documentary. There’s no winking at the audience. I like that. A lot.

I guess I can’t imagine shutting myself off from something that’s so highly regarded, and not just by geeks. Imagine someone who’s never seen a Humphrey Bogart movie because “that old stuff” is ‘not their cuppa’ when, if they saw The Maltese Falcon or The Treasure of the Sierra Madre or The African Queen or Casablanca they might slap themselves on the forehead and say “GAH! I can’t believe I’ve been depriving myself all these years!”

Don’t deprive yourself. At the very least, you can luxuriate in the colors, the costumes, the music and the atmosphere. At the very least, watch the first one. The Extended Edition will be in the theaters for one week, starting December 5. It needs to be seen on the big screen.

22

I’ve read the books, and still aren’t sure how the movie’ll end :smiley:

23

Equipoise, my sister finished both of the other books before seeing each of the movies, and neither time did it lessen her enjoyment of the movies. In fact, she was happy that she knew what else happened in the books because it filled in some of the gaps in the movies. It’s her goal to finish RotK before December 17th, so I’m just helping her along by giving her some incentive. :slight_smile:

24

And here, I think, you have hit precisely upon the reason that some fans of the books react negatively to things like the elves showing up at Helm’s Deep. For many, Middle Earth is as real as no matter, and changing the narrative is akin to lying about history. It’s as if a dramatization of the Battle of Britain had squadrons of USAAF P-47 Thunderbolts show up in the nick of time to assist the RAF. I leave it to the reader to imagine the reaction, and judge the legitimacy of such justifications as “Sometimes one needs to change the story to make it work as a movie.” :slight_smile:

My apologies for the slight hijack, but I find it interesting that you seem to understand the basis upon which the writings of Tolkien appeal and yet seem so impatient with those who react negatively to some of the liberties taken with the story.

25

No one can speak for Tolkien, but I can’t help but think he would also understand the idea of interpreting history and filling in gaps in the narrative. Bilbo and Frodo wrote about what they knew, helped by interviewing others as they could. They couldn’t know everything though, and perhaps it’s not so far-fetched that others could know things they didn’t. That’s about as far as I can go with that, because I’ve only read the books once, and then only skimming TTT and ROTK, and I’ve not read anything other Tolkien writings. I’m a base newbie. That idea works for me though.
The other angle, regarding the passing down of myths and legends and oral history, that makes me not really worry (or care) is that re-interpreting stories is a time-honored tradition.

Tolkien didn’t make up these stories. He did, of course, but he treated them as if they were real history, meaning that HIS version was what was “passed down” to him. That’s what I’ve assumed, anyway.

A tells B a story. B tells C the story. C tells D the story. You can bet that the story D tells E is altered and embellished from the story that A told B. F writes it down. G reads it to H. H tells it (from memory) to I. I re-enacts it for J. J writes it down. K makes a movie out of it. K’s version is as different from F’s as F’s is from A’s. All the fans of F’s original are squabbling while K’s movie version is causing millions to flock to read F’s version. Who wins? F and K’s viewers. Who wastes their time stamping their feet and blowing hot air? F’s readers.

Imagine the kids at Bilbo’s birthday party. Imgine one of them growing up and telling her enthralled kids the story that Bilbo told about the trolls. It’d be different, because it’s being interpreted by someone other than the person who experienced it. Then, of course, someone who had a copy of “There And Back Again” would come by and start arguing with the parent, bitching about how the trolls were turned into stone, not sand (geez!) and the spiders were far scarier looking. And dammit, there were 13 dwarves, not 12, silly person.

Ok, I’m not very good at this, and articulation is not one of my strengths, but it all comes down to my feeling that 1) Tolkien’s words are not so sacred that they can’t be re-interpreted and, 2) those words (changed a lot by the man himself, from what I hear) will always be available to be read and, 3) ARE and WILL be read by millions more people who wouldn’t have touched them had it not been for the movies.
The reason that “elves at Helm’s Deep” causes my brain to go ballistic is that while purists bitch about the mechanics and technicalities of why they shouldn’t have been there, I can only remember my reaction when they showed up, which was sheer thrilling joy, and my reaction when they died, which was overwhelming heartbreak. I was crying my eyes out, deeply moved by their loyalty and terrible sacrifice, not thinking about how they shouldn’t have been there in the first place and wouldn’t have had to die if Hacko Jacko had stuck to the book.

I only care about MY feelings here, not yours. Sorry, I’m gonna be selfish on this. The elves at Helm’s Deep was, for me, the most moving moment in the whole movie.

26

(Correction: I’ve read The Hobbit and Fellowship twice each)

27

I don’t know how it ends, and I’m looking forward to the last movie to find out. I’m avoiding all spoilers in the meantime.

I loved the previous two movies, and I even read Fellowship and about half of TTT in December and January after seeing TTT the movie, but the writing style killed me and I lost interest eventually. No offense to those who like it. I read comic books like crazy, but I realize they’re not to everyone’s taste.

28

The ending:

Frodo is dead, and Gollum and Sam are ghosts.

29

Equipoise, Tolkien’s been part of my mental landscape for 32 years. I’m having difficulty with how insistent you are being that those of us who are purist should drop all that and experience the movies and books in the same way you do.

It’s not possible. I love the books. I also happen to love the movies but there are things which offend the purist in me – how could they not? I’ve lived with my Middle-Earth for decades. It’s different to Peter Jackson’s Middle-Earth. The elves at Helms Deep don’t upset me as much as the portrayal of Aragorn and Arwen though. My Aragorn and Arwen had a more formal relationship than the movie versions.

And before asserting that Tolkien would have been fine with the movie interpretation, you might want to do some background reading. JRRT probably is spinning in his grave at this very moment. He never wanted the movies made and he definitely would have been spitting mad at the narrative changes.

My kid doesn’t know how it ends and I don’t think I can coerce him in reading the books by Boxing Day. I am thinking that we will prepare him for what happens although he’s saying he probably will choose not to go until he’s older.

30

I don’t really know how it ends, but I’ve had it sort of spoiled (I read part of the ending mentioned somewhere). I plan on reading the books after I see the last movie.

31

Tolkien, commenting on a proposed film treatment of LOTR. The passage in question is the attack by the Witch King at Weathertop:

Note that in PJ’s version Aragorn does indeed draw a sword at Weathertop. To be fair, PJ’s treatment is vastly better than the one on which Tolkien was commenting. Still, the lengthy commentary is scathing over relatively minor points, and at the time Tolkien badly needed the money a movie might have produced. So, I cannot agree that Tolkien wouldn’t have taken issue with some of the more major deviations, and even many of the minor. I think he would have been furious with things such as the wizard fight in FOTR, which he would have viewed as a ridiculous trivialization of the characters of Gandalf and Saruman.

That said, I myself am not furious over any of the changes. Indeed, I quite approve of some of them (even some Tolkien probably wouldn’t have liked), namely, those that have facilitated the translation to the screen. Others have not aided in this translation, and those I cannot appreciate, particularly where they have run contrary to major themes in Tolkien’s writings, which the elves at Helm’s Deep certainly do. So for me, the emotions evoked were not thrilling joy or overwhelming heartbreak. They couldn’t have been, as the elves arrival was simply too jarring for reasons both logistical and thematic. It made no more sense in Tolkien’s universe than would the timely arrival of a battalion of redcoats at the Alamo in ours: there’s no way they could have gotten there, and they wouldn’t have even if they could have. I won’t belabour the point, but to anyone thoroughy familiar with Middle Earth, that sequence could not have been moving. It was a sequence targetted solely at newcomers. Which would have been fine, if it hadn’t been such that it couldn’t help but detract from the enjoyment of longstanding fans. Consider, for example, if instead of the elves, PJ had had the Halbarad, Elrohir, Elledan and Co show up (with Anduril, even). This would have been a deviation, but it would have worked. And heck, two of them are even elves (well, half-elves).

That’s nice. I trust you’ll understand, then, if I don’t care about your feelings here, and say that for me, the elves were the most ridiculous part of the whole movie, and while their inclusion didn’t make me angry or anything, my involuntary eyerolling response didn’t aid in my appreciation of things.

32

So what you’re saying, Gorsnak, is that even though the book did have the Elves sending help to Helm’s Deep, it’s somehow a bastardization that in the movies, the Elves sent help to Helm’s Deep? Feh. You can’t just send three guys in a movie, and make it out to be a big help like you can in a book. So you do what you can, and preserve as much of the story as possible, by sending a small Elvish army to help.

The thing is, most of the purists do like the movies. Believe it or not, our nagging complaints are a sign of our appreciation, of both the books and the movies.

33

Peter Jackson put in the elves because he wanted the wait before Helm’s Deep to be moving for the audience.

“Oh no, there are only 200 soldiers, most of them just old men and young boys. Surely they will all be killed.”

And then the elves come to the rescue. Jackson should have just stuck to the FUCKING SOURCE MATERIAL.

There were 2000 (TWO-THOUSAND!) Rohan soldiers stationed at Helm’s Deep, not 200!!

Some people have the argument that “no book can be translated to the big screen completely unscathed.” And I agree with that. But some of the major changes (the elves at Helm’s Deep and Frodo being taken FAR off his course by being dragged to Osgiliath by Boromir part 2) are simply out of place and really screwed things up.

34

I have no earthly idea how the adventure ends, but I’m anxious to find out.

35

Oh I know how it ends… thanks to a roomie who loved to spoil things for me and explain things about the books and whatnot.

I have read almost the whole trilogy… I’m up to the last 6th of the book but have yet to finish it for some reason. Maybe because it was spoiled by some fool who wanted to tell me exactly what happened before I finished and the movie came out. I was into the book too but then finding out the end… well I haven’t picked it up in over a year… close to two… (Yeah I nearly finished the books around the time TTT came out)… maybe I should start in on RotK again and blank my mind except for it…

36

A wizard did it.

37

For you, poor things, for you.

38

Err. No. Wrong on all counts, or nearly all.

The book did not have elves sending help to Helm’s Deep in any way shape or form. The besieging of Helm’s Deep took place shortly after the failure of the Rohirrim defense of the Fords of the Isen (this is where Theodred fell, in the book). After the defending riders were scattered, Saruman’s army advanced on Helm’s Deep. When Theoden left Edoras (with Eomer and the aforementioned 2k riders) he was actually headed to the Fords to reinforce the defense there. But on the way a messenger reached them anouncing the defeat, which obliged them to withdraw to Helm’s Deep. Hence, it’s utterly ridiculous to imagine that the elves, living many days ride away, might have sent help to arrive at Helm’s Deep in the nick of time, since there would have been no way to predict there would be a battle there until 24-48 hours before it started. Now granted, they might have sent some force due to the general danger of attack from Isengard, and it just lucked out on the timing, but that’s a giant stretch. Anyways, the elves were busy defending their own borders. But I digress.

The modification I suggested was to have the Dunedan arrive instead of the elves. See, if you had read the books, you’d know that shortly after Helm’s Deep, the Dunedan (Rangers of the North, that is - remnants of the kingdom of Arnor, of whom Aragorn is the leader, technically being heir only to the throne of Arnor, while his claim to Gondor’s throne is more dubious, at least in the eyes of the men of Gondor) arrive seeking Aragorn, accompanied by the sons of Elrond (i.e., Elrohir and Elladan). They then accompany Aragorn till the end of the war. Given the trailers I’ve seen to date, I would be very surprised to see this included in ROTK.

So, you see, my suggestion was to have the Dunedan arrive earlier than they do in the book and assist in the battle. Now, granted, there were only 30 of them, but if we’re going to be changing things anyways, there’s no reason their numbers couldn’t have been boosted a little. This would have provided Equipoise with the same emotional balm he received from the elves, and wouldn’t have annoyed the hell out of everyone who understood why the elves made no sense.

39

Cervaise, dude, that sounds almost like the end of Return of the Jedi, not Return of the King! :smiley:

I’m jealous of you who don’t know the ending. You have such a wonderful emotional ride ahead of you.

40

Close, but different movie. :wink:

Why does every single discussion of Peter Jackson’s movies, no matter what the original question might have been, inevitably transform itself into a debate on the merits of the changes Jackson and his fellow filmmakers chose to make to Tolkien’s source? I could have sworn that the original question here centered on viewers who are coming to the movies fresh and don’t know how Gollum will kill Sam in his sleep… er, I’ve given it away, haven’t I? :wink:

I just wish we could confine those arguments to the appropriate threads, but apparently it isn’t possible. I guess we’re gonna need a new Godwin’s rule or something.