RotK trailer and concerns (Spoilers)

Cafe Society
1

OK, so the trailer for RETURN OF THE KING has been pretty clear, “There is no victory without loss” and so forth. The implication is pretty strong that there will be characters who die.

Now, in the book, we have:spoiler Theoden, killed by the Nazgul
(2) Denethor, but we haven’t yet met him in the movies, so it’s not like he’ll be a “loss” of major significance
(3) Gollum, but then, that’s not quite “loss” in the sense of being mourned
(4) Arwen loses her immortality, but she and Aragorn have many happy years together
(5) The whole crowd who sail off to the Uttermost West, but that’s not “death” per se, that’s a version of riding off to the castle in the clouds, it’s a sort of death-avoidance happy-ever-after, right? [/spoiler]

So, my question is: do we think that Peter Jackson is changing the story to cause some unexpected “loss” or death???

2

No.

3

Then why the VERY heavy emphasis?

4

Perhaps to build up the tension and excitement, and to

make movie fans who haven’t read the books yet think that everyone will die by the end of the movie?

I’ve always thought of (5) in your spoiler box as one of the saddest things I’ve ever read.

I know they’re going to the Undying Lands, but they are still leaving behind many beloved people and things in Middle-Earth. Also, even though Arwen gets to have many happy years with Aragorn, she has given up her chance to be with her kin and does die of sorrow after Aragorn’s death.

5

To add to your list -

Saruman and Sauron sort of die, and Grima definitely does.

6

and don’t forget:

Snowmane buys it too, along with Halbarad Dunadan. And the brothers Handlebar and Hersheybar.

7

CK, you’re dismissing the obvious. They’re talking about

Frodo, who is first mentally destroyed by the Ring and then has to leave Middle Earth and everything he loves behind. It helps to know that the phrase “to go West” was euphemism for dying long before Tolkien ever got a hold of it.

8

They’re talking about Frodo’s finger.

9

Wumpus:

And does “giving someone the finger” also precede Tolkien? :slight_smile:

10

CK:

“bittersweet victory” was a - if not the - major theme of the whole trilogy. We will win, but at what cost? By the end of the novels, every race except Men has been diminished, many have died, and the world has changed, not necessarily for the better, but in ways long foreseen. One member in the Fellowship is so spiritually wounded that his heart can never be at rest again.

Even in victory, there seemed to be sorrow enough to go around. Check out the last couple paragraphs and poem closing the The Battle of the Pellenor Fields chapter in the ROTK novel. If the ROTK movie were a carbon copy of the third book, then there’s plenty of loss to be borne.

11

“But,” said Sam, and tears started in his eyes, “I thought you were going to enjoy the Shire, too, for years and years, after all you have done.”
"So I thought too, once. But I have been too deeply hurt, Sam. I tried to save the Shire, and it has been saved, but not for me. It must often be so, Sam, when things are in danger: some one has to give them up, lose them, so that others may keep them.

12

I don’t know how relevant that is here, but I think it’s one of the most major senses of loss. Yes, Sauron has been defeated, but the elves and wizards and ents leave varyingly anyway, and we end up with a world of men - ‘our world’. If you love Tolkein for the magic, well, that goes away.

OTOH, it’s inevitable, and there’s a lot to gain too.

13

I wonder if there’s also an allusion to what happens at Cirith Ungol:

When Frodo “dies” and Sam decides to carry on the quest alone.

Aside from Shelob’s brief appearance, there aren’t any scenes of that part of the story in the trailer, and they’re very coy about it in the ROTK preview on the theatrical DVD, only showing a couple of very heart-rending still shots.

If you haven’t read the books, that part has to come as a big shock. Even knowing about it, and how everything turns out afterwards, I’m still quite prepared to cry my eyeballs out at this point if Mr. Jackson has done his job right.

14

spoiler- as I still haven’t figured out that damn box

Gollum’s fate may well be shown in a heart-rending way. I feel for poor little Smeagol & I bet his fate will be surprisingly portrayed.

15

OH i just lost my original post :frowning:

Anyway, basically… I dont think Pete Jackson will kill off any character that doesnt get killed in the book. I know hes a lot of things about the books, but he says that they were recquired for the transition to the big screen, and I understand that, without the changes we could well be looking at 5 hr movies a piece!
Anyway, Jackson himself is a self confessed LOTR fanatic, I dont think he personally would want to any of those that dont die, to die, because then its changing LOTR and Middle Earth history too much, if you get my meaning.

Regarding the “There can be no triumph without Loss” Just as thats said in the trailer, we see Gandalf walking across what we could probably assume to be the aftermath of the battle of the Pelennor Fields, and I think that loss is basically the death of the soldiers of Gondor, Rohan, the Dunedain, and possibly the elves, as well as the deaths of the Stewards and King.

Although In saying all that, there are deaths in ROTK that are different to the Book… the following spoiler is from the LOTR Trivial Pursuit and are assumed to be spoilers from ROTK and so potentially could be MAJOR spoilers. Youve been warned.

Legolas kills Grima, shoots him with an arrow, and Saruman dies from falling out the window in Orthanc (actually that spoiler came from the ROTK video game, sounds kinda dumb to be honest)

But to get back to the original thread, there is one shot in the trailer that makes me think a certain character could die… Anyway!

NitPick: Theoden doesnt get killed by a Nazgul, his horse gets scared of a Nazgul, and throws him off, he then rolls over on top of him, so its the horse that kills him

16

I doubt PJ would kill off any major characters that don’t die in the book, but he might sacrifice a secondary character

like Haldir in TTT.

The line from the trailer reminds me of Galadriel’s line in TTT:

“There is nothing more we can do for Frodo. The quest will claim his life.”

My first thought was, how can Galadriel say something so flagrantly untrue? We all know Frodo lives. Then it hit me that the quest does rob Frodo of the life he wanted, of his home, of his friends, of “everything I had and might have had.” Yes, he goes on to a better place, but by rights he should have gone after many long years in the Shire he struggled so valiantly to save, surrounded by people he loved, celebrating his eleventy-first birthday under a mallorn tree… This line’s ambiguity really made me think about the tragic nature of the quest and drove home the theme of sacrifice.

Delly, look here if you dare…

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=222036

17

I read it TWDuke, am not overly impressed, but if it makes it on too the Extended Version of the DVD then thats good enough for me!

18

That’s how I feel as well Delly. My friends and I will be seeing ROTK as soon as it comes out, and I’m sure the ones who haven’t read the book could care less about what’s discussed in the other thread. My SO and I however, will also be anxiously waiting for the Extended Edition to see everything that will be left out of the theatrical release.

19

I’ll leave my feelings about whats in the other thread in the other thread. I only introduced it here to suggest we shouldn’t assume something’s going to be in the movie because it’s in the book (or the board game). About the only things we can be sure of are that a king will return and the ring will fall into the fires of Mt. Doomone way or another!