Originally posted by: Obi Jeewhyen
I agree that the fundamentals of the story must be left intact. The scouring could be lopped off and Frodo would still quest to destroy the ring, the ring would still be destroyed, but you could say the same for many film adaptations. Unnecessary stuff abounds.
In any case, as I posted in the other thread, Jackson admits he had no passion for 9-out-of-10 story points in The Return of the King, and it shows. Great as the movie trilogy was, that should have been his red flag to leave this project alone. Ultimately, I consider it a failure. One great movie out of three is simply not sufficient.
The Scouring of the Shire was not merely a rousing bit of action, it was the demonstration of the main characters' arcs ... their growth from simple, rural hobbits to world-wise, inner-strength-filled, uber-hobbits!
Isn't that what the entire rest of the trilogy was about, though? They didn't become uber-Hobbits only because of the Scouring. Sam's growth was well chronicled when dealing with Shelob and his subsequent battle with the Orcs at Cirith Ungul (sp?), and we know what Frodo and the others did, though I thought Jackson went a little too far by having them lead the charge at the Battle of the Black Gate (second only to Aragorn), though I admit I don't remember how that was in the book. I think there were two scenes at the end that perfectly illustrated the changes they'd undergone: When they all rode into the Shire on horseback, and when they were at the Green Dragon, sitting by themselves, nobody speaking, but each knowing how things had changed. Those scenes said it all
While I still debate the vitality of the showing the Scouring, I don't feel the ending was superfluous at all considering that the Grey Havens and Sam's return to Bag End are chronicled in the book. Personally, I WISH they'd fleshed out the ending and the reunion at Minas Tirith more than they did.
I am all for not simply filming the book. Changes are good. But the basics of a famous story must not be changed. That is folly.
Isn't that what the entire rest of the trilogy was about, though? They didn't become uber-Hobbits only because of the Scouring. Sam's growth was well chronicled when dealing with Shelob and his subsequent battle with the Orcs at Cirith Ungul (sp?), and we know what Frodo and the others did, though I thought Jackson went a little too far by having them lead the charge at the Battle of the Black Gate (second only to Aragorn), though I admit I don't remember how that was in the book. I think there were two scenes at the end that perfectly illustrated the changes they'd undergone: When they all rode into the Shire on horseback, and when they were at the Green Dragon, sitting by themselves, nobody speaking, but each knowing how things had changed. Those scenes said it all
Considering that most audiences felt the movie's ending went on and on and on (the 12 endings of Return of the King is legend in parody) ... there was certainly room for this VITAL story point in the films.
While I still debate the vitality of the showing the Scouring, I don't feel the ending was superfluous at all considering that the Grey Havens and Sam's return to Bag End are chronicled in the book. Personally, I WISH they'd fleshed out the ending and the reunion at Minas Tirith more than they did.
I am all for not simply filming the book. Changes are good. But the basics of a famous story must not be changed. That is folly.
I agree that the fundamentals of the story must be left intact. The scouring could be lopped off and Frodo would still quest to destroy the ring, the ring would still be destroyed, but you could say the same for many film adaptations. Unnecessary stuff abounds.
In any case, as I posted in the other thread, Jackson admits he had no passion for 9-out-of-10 story points in The Return of the King, and it shows. Great as the movie trilogy was, that should have been his red flag to leave this project alone. Ultimately, I consider it a failure. One great movie out of three is simply not sufficient.
Again this is all very subjective. I love the adaption, and think ROTK was the best movie of the 3, followed by FOTR then TTT. An audio-visual medium can't be judged solely on the basis of how faithful it was to the inspirational text. The production values, character development, music, acting, sets, and effects were the best I've ever seen. It suffered in no way from excluding the Scouring. The people who take issue with it are (mostly) very close to the books. If you ask Joe Sixpack about it he'd say "Huh?", and then go on to talk about what a great experience it was. I was there for the all-day screening of the first two movies (extended editions) followed by the midnight showing of ROTK and loved every minute of it.