Return of the King Discussion Thread (MAJOR SPOILERS!)

[phongn]

Although I agree with everyone that it was an awesome movie, I don't think it was as flawless as many claim. Some of the editing was very annoying. Not because of cut scenes, but because of the pacing. Massive fast-paced battles and then scenes of people staring at eachother with anguished faces for minutes at a time. I wanted to scream at some points to get on with it, because it was totally obvious what was happening and they were interrupting the flow of the fights.

I found that editing annoying as well. Some of the cuts in particular were too tight, they could have used a bit of padding. Hopefully the EE will address these issues.

[zombie84]

Just saw it.

Great movie, but not a perfect one.

Astounding battle scenes, excellent high drama and breathtaking visuals.

The bad? Some melodramatic bits and an extremly dragged out ending, which many have rightfully complained about. I'm sure most will agree that its necessary to tie up the story threads but it just went on and on; there were at least four or five instances where it seems as though the movie going to end--the audience is ready for it to end and is anticipating it--but it continues on, again and again. Definitly a no-no. It really dampens the overall feeling of the film. The final last bit with Sam seemed especially unnecessary.

There were also too many speeches of "I Believe in You" and "Today We Fight"--kinda necessary when theres so many Big Battle™ scenes i guess.

My only other complaints deals with the story arc itself, but that lies more with Tolkien than Jackson.

But its easier to pick on the bad than the good because so much of the movie is great. A sweeping story with atsounding visuals, great characters and a truely epic feel. Remember when the opening battle in Gladiator was the biggest battle sequence in film? Watch it again--it feels like a petty skirmish compaired to this. My only fear is how will anyone ever top what is surely the most focal of sequences in the films, the battles? I think this series will stand the test of time for many decades to come.

An important entry in cinema history. Not perfect--not by any stretch, but what film is? This is as good as LOTR will ever get, and about as good as a fantasy epic shall ever be.

[baelfire1945]

This was by far the best film I have ever seen. I actually thought cutting from the fast-paced battles to slower scenes was done very well and added to the emotional impact of both types of scene by comparison.

So far as Arwen being shoehorned in, she really needed to end up with Aragorn at the end (blatantly contradicting the book and sending her off to Valinor would have ruined the movie for me); and they certainly didn't have time to add a full wedding scene to the movie, especially on the level it was done in the novel.

I have to admit that I was very upset witht the scouring of the Shire being cut, but after seeing the movie twice I must say that I couldn't care less anymore. What they did in the time they were alotted was simply phenomenol.

[Meest]

Thought it was great way of cutting all the necessary parts of the book to make the movie work. George Lucas really needs to pull a miracle to top this.

Quick question, wasn't there another lieutenant of Sauron at the Black Gate? Thought that would've helped that battle a bit.

Only other pet peeve but its more about the whole trilogy, make Gandalf be a bit more magical, not a god amoung men, but more than just shining light. Use some of that TK or whatever when he fought Saruman. The Orc leader seems fearfull of the wizard, but we don't get that impression as a goblin nearly offs him

[El Moose Monstero]

Yes, there was, the Mouth Piece of Mordor, he was supposed to present Frodo's clothes, which must be in the extended edition to warrant them mentioning it in Minas Morgul.

[Robert Treder]

This movie was pretty good, but it wasn't as good as the first one. Here are some of my thoughts:

It has some of the same problems as the first two, most notably totally uninteresting and unintimidating bad guys. The orcs are stupid; I don't know why they think that a bunch of bumbling idiots with rusty, rickety weapons are scarier than intelligent, well-armed bad guys.

Why didn't Gandalf just light the torches if he wanted them lit? Why get Pippin to do it for him? Surely a magician the likes of Gandalf can light some dry sticks on fire...

The fact that a whole shitload of orcs killed themselves over Frodo's mithril was both a huge fucking writing copout and an example of how completely fucking double plus un-good the orcs are as bad guys. This shit is straight out of Duck Tales.

Arwen's storyline kind of pops up towards the beginning, and then I guess you're supposed to forget about it (which is all right by me, since Liv Tyler is a fucking horrible actress) for about two and a half hours, and then, just at the end, they say, "PS, happily ever after, motherfucker!" So that was kind of weird.

On the upside, the battle scenes were much better than in TTT. The Oliphants in particular were pretty wicked.

Also on the upside, it wrapped everything up pretty nicely, and even though it probably could have been a bit shorter, it didn't put me to sleep, and that's all I really ask.

All in all, I'd give this a 7/10.

[NecronLord]

The good:

Minas Morgul. Despite managing to leave it off Faramir's map (are the scouts of Gondor meant to be totally inept?) in TTT, they not only included it, but exceeded my expectations of the place.

Shelob. She looked poor in the glimpse of her in the trailer. Mercifully, she looks much better the more you see of her.

The rest of the film. Does this need explaining?

The bad:

Angmar's helm. He is not the bad guy from the 'Scream' films. It just makes him look silly. Very silly, is he going to defeat the White Wizard by crippling him with laughter or something? If I had done it, I would have left it as a crown, peferably of silver, that seems to shimmer with dark sorcery.

The Mouth/Voice of Sauron. Didn't exist. Hopefully he'll be in the extended versions.

[Dalton]

This movie was pretty good, but it wasn't as good as the first one. Here are some of my thoughts:

It has some of the same problems as the first two, most notably totally uninteresting and unintimidating bad guys. The orcs are stupid; I don't know why they think that a bunch of bumbling idiots with rusty, rickety weapons are scarier than intelligent, well-armed bad guys.

Orcs are supposed to be stupid. They were created in mockery of the elves, but there are a whole fucking lot of them, which is why they're so effective.

Why didn't Gandalf just light the torches if he wanted them lit? Why get Pippin to do it for him? Surely a magician the likes of Gandalf can light some dry sticks on fire...

Gandalf had already pissed off Denethor. I doubt he would have liked to do so more.

The fact that a whole shitload of orcs killed themselves over Frodo's mithril was both a huge fucking writing copout and an example of how completely fucking double plus un-good the orcs are as bad guys. This shit is straight out of Duck Tales.

Isn't it how it happened in the books? Orcs are incredibly greedy and territorial.

[Ted C]

This movie was pretty good, but it wasn't as good as the first one.

I've personally found them all rather disappointing. Jackson's decisions about what to leave out and what to add in have put me off many time. Not enough to keep me from watching and enjoying the movies, but there's always a bad aftertaste.

It has some of the same problems as the first two, most notably totally uninteresting and unintimidating bad guys. The orcs are stupid; I don't know why they think that a bunch of bumbling idiots with rusty, rickety weapons are scarier than intelligent, well-armed bad guys.

Yeah, the orc incompentence has been hammed up a bit.

Why didn't Gandalf just light the torches if he wanted them lit? Why get Pippin to do it for him? Surely a magician the likes of Gandalf can light some dry sticks on fire...

Indeed, that's one of the things Gandalf was really good at in the books. That conflict was really silly, though. Denethor did have the signals lit in the novels. He wasn't the total jerk that the movies made him out to be. I think one of my worst complaints about these movies is how the secondary characters of Denethor, Faramer, and Theoden have been dumbed down.

The fact that a whole shitload of orcs killed themselves over Frodo's mithril was both a huge fucking writing copout and an example of how completely fucking double plus un-good the orcs are as bad guys. This shit is straight out of Duck Tales.

It's also straight out of the novel. Cirith Ungol was jointly manned by orcs from Barad-Dur and Minas Morgul, and they never got along well in the first place. The fight over Frodo's mithril shirt was all "off screen" in the book, but it pretty much took place as depicted in the movie.

Arwen's storyline kind of pops up towards the beginning, and then I guess you're supposed to forget about it (which is all right by me, since Liv Tyler is a fucking horrible actress) for about two and a half hours, and then, just at the end, they say, "PS, happily ever after, motherfucker!" So that was kind of weird.

The Hollywood-izing of Arwen is my other major complaint about these movies. She was a minor character in the books, and she should have stayed one in the movies. The time wasted on her could have been better spent on some of the most important character-building moments from the books that were cut from the movies.

On the upside, the battle scenes were much better than in TTT. The Oliphants in particular were pretty wicked.

I wasn't terribly thrilled with the Oliphaunt/Mumakil fighting. Sure, it looked cool, but it made Theoden into any idiot for charging them headlong. In the book, Prince Imrahil got killed leading his horse archers to kill Oliphaunts by shooting them through they eye; it would have been nice to see Theoden display some sense by doing the same instead of charging straight in to get trampled.

I was frequently disappointed by the pacing. In the book, Theoden literally arrived in the nick of time, when the ram had finally broken the gate of Minas Tirith and the Lord of the Nazgul was getting ready to ride through (and only Gandalf was able to face him). The orcs were about to pour into Minas Tirith when the horns of Rohan sounded, and the Witch King had to leave the gate to deal with the unexpected flank charge. That was a tense scene in the book that didn't happen in the movie.

I was also disappointed in Eowyn's portrayal. In the book, it was never obvious that Eowyn had sneaked into the army until she took off her helm in front of the Witch King. She did that before the actual fight started, giving you a chance to see the moment of doubt in the Witch King's mind when he realized that he couldn't rely on the prophecy to protect him from her. There was a bit of surprise value in her appearance that Jackson made no effort to capture in the movie.

The temporary split between Frodo and Sam just struck me as so wrong I could scarcely believe I was seeing it.

Furthermore, Jackson left out the moment in which the Ring played a crucial role in its own demise. When Gollum pounced on Frodo and Sam at the foot of Mount Doom, Frodo held the Ring and cursed Gollum to fall into the fires if he ever dared touch Frodo again. I always felt that was a critical moment, and Jackson dropped it completely. In fact, he dropped pretty much all of Frodo's best moments, making him into a very weak and unsympathetic character (IMHO).

And yes, I did miss Gandalf's confrontation with Saruman at Orthanc.

Yes, it was a pretty good movie, but it wasn't nearly as good as it could have been, IMO, and I guess that's what left me feeling kind of flat. Too much of a perfectionist, I suppose.

[Dalton]

In the book, Prince Imrahil got killed leading his horse archers to kill Oliphaunts by shooting them through they eye;

Where the hell did this happen? Imrahil was the temporary ruler of Minas Tirith until Aragorn finally came in!

[Ted C]

In the book, Prince Imrahil got killed leading his horse archers to kill Oliphaunts by shooting them through they eye;

Where the hell did this happen? Imrahil was the temporary ruler of Minas Tirith until Aragorn finally came in!

I must be getting character names wrong. I'm sure there was some prince or captain from southern Gondor who got killed that way, though.

[Melkor]

It's some totally obscure charecter, no one nearly as important as Imrahil. I checked and the person in question is Duilin of Morthond and his brother.

[CaptainChewbacca]

The fight in the tower with the orcs is EXACTLY like the book, and the witch-king's crown is supposed to be a big iron thingy. I actually thought Theoden's charge on the Mumakil was pretty awesome. They see the enemy coming and they know it can't be allowed to reach the gate; their only choice is to attack.

Not to rag on anyone here, but some of the reviews I've seen obviously were written by people who havn't read the books. One guy was calling P.J a racist for making all his heroes white and the bad guys black or arab, and that he gives no good roles for women except for Eowyn's killing of the witch-king which was highly unbelievable.

I think the books were an excellent adaptation and I can live without Hama the captain of the guard and Prince Imrahil of Dol Amroth (why can't he be king of Gondor?)

[PackMule]

Call me a PJ fanwhore if you will (Im from NZ) , but I really enjoyed the film.

Personally ever since TPM I have just simply stopped building up my expectations about movies. I now just expect that movies are going to be crap. That way, when I do see a good film, I am suprised and I enjoy it more.

Why didn't Gandalf just light the torches if he wanted them lit? Why get Pippin to do it for him? Surely a magician the likes of Gandalf can light some dry sticks on fire...

I had thought that Gandalf was simply trying to make Pippin feel useful, and that by giving the Hobbit something to do it would take his mind off what he saw in the Palantir

The Hollywood-izing of Arwen is my other major complaint about these movies. She was a minor character in the books, and she should have stayed one in the movies. The time wasted on her could have been better spent on some of the most important character-building moments from the books that were cut from the movies.

Spend more time on important character building? Arwen was one of the core parts of Aragorn's character, and without the proper development of Arwen, and thus the Arwen/Aragorn relationship the movie would have suffered. Arwens choice to not go to the Grey Havens was a central part of Aragorns internal conflict. By increasing her character from the small role in the books, PJ has added more depth to the film version of Aragorn.


I see a number of people have said that the ending was too long. Personally I found it just right, and the scene at the end with Sam and his family is still one of my favorites because it shows that, dispite the changes everyone has been through and all of trials of the third age, life in The Shire goes on and that the sacrifices made on the journey were worth it to save the world from Sauron and The Ring. Was there something in particular that made the ending seem long, or was was it just the fact that after 3&1/2 hours people didn't was 20 minutes of ending?

[CJvR]

Well I have finaly seen it after a long long wait.

I have to say that Im somewhat split over what to think about RotK.

The Isengaard scene was a solid faliure, it was pointless to have in RotK and was only included because they needed to fetch the hobbits. I don't know what possessed Jackson to cut the Gandalf/Saruman showdown from tTT. He complained that tTT didn't have a good finish and then he axes one of the greatest scenes there is in the entire LotR!!!

The film was grand and epic, never doubt that, and the entry into Minas Tirith stunningly spectacular, but...

There are a few very anoying flaws, Faramirs kamikaze charge being the first one. IIRC Faramir and his troops went out to reinforce and try to hold the river defences and he was wounded in the fighting withdraw, a much better story than the reenactment of the charge of the light brigade.

RotK is great up to about the final stages of the siege of Minas Tirith when it fails on many points.

Jackson again axes one of the greatest scenes in LotR, this time it is the confrontation between Gandalf and Angmar at the gates! Instead we are shown an absence of Angmar and Gandalf cowering behind a gate three levels up in the city writing his last will and testament.

Angmar, Mordors champion #1, is finaly introduced and swiftly dispached without ever showing why he was so feared. Jackson complained earlier about an absence of villains and when he get the greatest one in the LotR to play with that is how he is treated? Angmar preparing to take on Gandalf is the pivot of the entire battle yet it is axed, for what?

Bringing the dead to the battle might have looked cool but having the green fungus spread over Minas Tirith and saving the day was a disasterously poor idea, having them work merely as Aragorns reinforcements did in the books would have been much better.

The non-Frodo/Sam parts of the later third was rather poorly glued together, probably a sign of time saving cuts.

The Palantir was wasted, appart from Pippins experience with it it was never seen. When they asked how to draw Saurons attention after the battle I almost screamed "Use the F*****G Palantir" Like Aragorn did in the books, it would have made a great scene - but like so many great scenes it was axed in favor of a confused council where Gandalf seems to be suffering from Alzheimers and the start of a severe case of Denethors diceace.

We then cut to... a pitiful infantry phalanx in front of the Morannon! No wonder Sauron was reluctant to open the gates, I wouldn't have opened my gates to such a gang of hoboes either!

Seriously coming after the assault on Minas Tirith with it's staggering battlescenes that rabble hardly looked impressive at all and neither did the Orcs that hardly seemed to number more than one of Angmars regiments. Sauron had reserves ten times stronger than the army destroyed at Minas Tirith. The armies of the west should have been organized in splendid battleformations more spectacular than the Rohirrim charge rather than the streetmob formation they used. The areal shots should have shown the true power of Mordor, armies that made Angmars boys look small and weak, almost all of Udun should have been packed with troops.

I think Jackson should have cut the film after the celebration in Minas Tirith rather than going back to the Shire, the contrast to what the Hobbits found there in the book compared to the film didn't work in favor of the film.

Final impression: RotK is probably the weakest of the films, although Im comparing it to the extended versions of the previous two.

FotR is a clear *****
tTT is only **** because the absence of the Gandalf/Saruman showdown and the Ents decission not to fight.
RotK get ***** for the first tow thirds but only ** for the last third. Hopefully the extended version will correct most of the flaws, particulary Gandalf/Angmar but also Gandalf/Saruman (Although that should really be in tTT).

[Anarchist Bunny]

HOLY CRAP! That was such an awsome fucking movie. All the things I wanted to see happened. Shelob was scary(I HATE spiders). Nothing I've seen in a movie ever has compared to the battle of shit your pants(as one review called it). That was just so kick ass.

Few things that annoyed me:

Legolas sliding down the trunk, bleh. Just looked goofy. Ofcourse I soon forgot it after the funniest line in the movie.(Gimli is my favorite)

Pippin. Sam stood up to Shelob, Merry stabbed the Witch King in the back of the leg, Frodo had to carry the ring through the whole thing. At the battle at the black gate, instead of Pippin showing his worth by taking out a troll(and near getting killed by it), Aragorn is almost killed by a troll and is saved after the ring is destroyed.

[CJvR]

Also a thought...

What happened to the elves?

They made excelent replacement rangers at Helmsdeep so why not continue to use them that way?

[Melkor]

Also a thought...

What happened to the elves?

They made excelent replacement rangers at Helmsdeep so why not continue to use them that way?

Gah. Heathen!!

[Ted C]

The Hollywood-izing of Arwen is my other major complaint about these movies. She was a minor character in the books, and she should have stayed one in the movies. The time wasted on her could have been better spent on some of the most important character-building moments from the books that were cut from the movies.

Spend more time on important character building? Arwen was one of the core parts of Aragorn's character, and without the proper development of Arwen, and thus the Arwen/Aragorn relationship the movie would have suffered. Arwens choice to not go to the Grey Havens was a central part of Aragorns internal conflict. By increasing her character from the small role in the books, PJ has added more depth to the film version of Aragorn.

Begging your pardon, but Aragorn is one of the most misrepresented characters in the movies. The Aragorn of the novels was not the self-doubting, running-from-his-past loner that we've seen in the movies. He was the rightful heir to Gondor, and he was on a mission to redeem his family and reclaim his thrown. Yes, he loved Arwen, but that was not the defining aspect of his character. He was the King of Gondor, the Heir of Elendil, and he was out to live up to that heritage. You could have a nice-looking nobody play the part of Arwen with a third of the screentime (and probably a tenth of the cost) and get all of the Arwen the movies would need.

[Stravo]

The Hollywood-izing of Arwen is my other major complaint about these movies. She was a minor character in the books, and she should have stayed one in the movies. The time wasted on her could have been better spent on some of the most important character-building moments from the books that were cut from the movies.

Spend more time on important character building? Arwen was one of the core parts of Aragorn's character, and without the proper development of Arwen, and thus the Arwen/Aragorn relationship the movie would have suffered. Arwens choice to not go to the Grey Havens was a central part of Aragorns internal conflict. By increasing her character from the small role in the books, PJ has added more depth to the film version of Aragorn.

Begging your pardon, but Aragorn is one of the most misrepresented characters in the movies. The Aragorn of the novels was not the self-doubting, running-from-his-past loner that we've seen in the movies. He was the rightful heir to Gondor, and he was on a mission to redeem his family and reclaim his thrown. Yes, he loved Arwen, but that was not the defining aspect of his character. He was the King of Gondor, the Heir of Elendil, and he was out to live up to that heritage. You could have a nice-looking nobody play the part of Arwen with a third of the screentime (and probably a tenth of the cost) and get all of the Arwen the movies would need.

Godamnit THANK YOU. That's exactly right. The self doubting Aragorn is a creation of PJ and his wife. Same as movie Faramir aka Boromir v2.0.

[HemlockGrey]

I actually prefer the movie Faramir.

[Ted C]

I actually prefer the movie Faramir.

HERETIC!

In the books, Faramir was clearly a better human being than Boromir. In the movie, Faramir was exactly what every other critic has called him... "Boromir Lite".

[Rye]

Well, i saw this yesterday and i must say it's my favourite one so far. I agree with what's already been said, the editing didn't quite work, but otherwise, very epic and eyecatching.

Although i think Aragorn should've put a few extra constraints on the ghosties, after all, staying with the rest of them till sauron is destroyed would have been a great help and if it was either that or never ever find rest, i know which i'd choose.

The witch king was bitchin, although i agree with Necronlord's scream mask thing. Perhaps if it didn't have the whole jaw thing it would've been better.

Oliphaunts = cool.

I did think the gimps that were controlling the oliphaunts had genuinely scary masks too.

When the ring was destroyed it didn't happen like i imagined it in the books, iirc, there was supposed to be a weird cloud form sauron reaching towards the hobbits covered in lightning, but that seemed to be ignored in favour of a big shockwave and shit falling down. Which was cool, but they could've had that and the big ghost of sauron too.

Shelob was fucking ICKY. But a good spider beastie.

I thought the ending was too sappy and nice. I would've had a fucked up burning shire and just not explained it for time reasons, then had a little thing from sam with the book saying how he lead the hobbits and fixed the shire, along with a montage.

Oh and i was getting groped pretty much all the way through it, excellent movie!

Oh and necronlord: do you mean sauron's voice didn't exist in the book or the film? Cos i definately heard it in the film at some points.

[PackMule]

The Hollywood-izing of Arwen is my other major complaint about these movies. She was a minor character in the books, and she should have stayed one in the movies. The time wasted on her could have been better spent on some of the most important character-building moments from the books that were cut from the movies.

Spend more time on important character building? Arwen was one of the core parts of Aragorn's character, and without the proper development of Arwen, and thus the Arwen/Aragorn relationship the movie would have suffered. Arwens choice to not go to the Grey Havens was a central part of Aragorns internal conflict. By increasing her character from the small role in the books, PJ has added more depth to the film version of Aragorn.

Begging your pardon, but Aragorn is one of the most misrepresented characters in the movies. The Aragorn of the novels was not the self-doubting, running-from-his-past loner that we've seen in the movies. He was the rightful heir to Gondor, and he was on a mission to redeem his family and reclaim his thrown. Yes, he loved Arwen, but that was not the defining aspect of his character. He was the King of Gondor, the Heir of Elendil, and he was out to live up to that heritage. You could have a nice-looking nobody play the part of Arwen with a third of the screentime (and probably a tenth of the cost) and get all of the Arwen the movies would need.

But I think that from a cinematic point of view adding Aragorn's doubt about himself and the race of men in general was excellent character development, because it means that Aragorn has to over come his own fears and doubts. I'll admit that I'm not a big reader of the books. Perhaps someone could explain to me the sort of character development the Aragorn in the books underwent.

How much did Liv Tyler get paid to play Arwen? Frankly I can't understand peoples problem with the fact that her character was expanded from the book.

[Stravo]

The Hollywood-izing How much did Liv Tyler get paid to play Arwen? Frankly I can't understand peoples problem with the fact that her character was expanded from the book.

So you had no problem with Arwen's life force suddenly out of nowhere being linked to the fate of the ring? Where did that come from, book or not, it was never hinted in the movies at all and smelled of desparetly trying to make Arwen MATTER to the story when she most certainly did not. She was at best a tertiary charcater in the book, sort of "Hey this is Aragorn's love interest" and that was it. To suddenly link her fate to that of the ring smacked of lazy writing to try and make people care and create a very false sense of drama.

And no, she did mostly nothing in the books, Tolkien wasn't writing a Harlequin romance.