*SPOILERS*ROTK,a very disappointing end to what could have been the best trilogy ever

First off, as some one who read the books and gave the first movie an 8 out of 10 and a 10 out of 10 for the second, the third is a very disappointing 4 out of 10. In fact I was so inspired by the first movie it motivated me to finally finish the last book and a half I had to read.

Let me say that most if not all my problems come on the cinematic side not story side.

The movie is called the Return of the King: Yet most of the story is about the King of Rohan(sp?) and his niece and the steward of Gondor(sp?) and his son. The story was barely about Aragorn and him coming back to the throne. There needs to be more time spent on him and his struggle to be the king.

In the book I am pretty sure we know that Sam took the ring off the body of Frodo at the moment it happened. I’m also pretty sure Sam used the ring to save Frodo, but I could be wrong.(Just found out i was right, Sam did use the ring) But at any rate, how much better would that scene, where Sam has trouble giving back the ring, if we knew the whole time Frodo was captured Sam had it. (and had used it)

Also, cinematically it was the wrong choice to put all your eggs into the first war at the walls of Gondor. For the last two movies you have been featuring the three main characters as Aragorn, Legolas and Gamling, and than you focus on that war where they are not even a part of it until the very end? And their part in that war is over with in a minute. And so you have this huge battle with out your three main guys, in the middle of your film and you still have one major battle to go. And for that last battle you give it a tenth of the time you give the first.

Can Sam and Frodo be any more in love with each other? I know there not but the way they acted and the way it was shot tell a different story. A better example than ROTK of male bonding after a life long journey of hardship is “The Shawshank Redemption”.

Why does Aragorn become a “Backstreet Boy” when he becomes the King? Perfect hair, clothes and a solo ballad that would put Mariah Carry to shame, he was the perfect King for them cause they could relate to him. Than he becomes king and forgets who he is? The Ranger from the north, that’s what will make him the prefect King he had flaws.

In passing this movie could have been saved, I like it cause I got to see what I read even though I think that cinematically it was really bad and the studio should of done what they did before. Make Jackson cut it down to 2 hours and 30 mins and save all this for the Extended DVD.

Cuts that needed to be made:

Opening scene: We don’t need to know how
Gollum got the ring in the third movie that would have been better in the first.(He should of added more about what happened to Sarumon(sp?), since he was the villain for the first 2 movies.)

Cut any shots of the conflict with of the Stewart and his son’s conflict. Don’t need that side story this late in the movies. All we needed to know was the Steward was week and didn’t want to give up the throne.

Take a risk, end the movie with Frodo and Sam on the mountainside. Those of us that know what happens still know, those that don’t can feel there sacrifice more. Ok if you don’t want to do that, than don’t fake end it. That just doesn’t make scene. I have never seen that before. Fade to black for 8 secs and come back to the same exact scene. It had no purpose or meaning at all.

Ok so you don’t cut it there, you can still save it when everyone kneels to the Hobbits. Perfect time to end it. Ok you don’t want to save it there and you want to change the ending of the book at the Shire ,than save it by cutting it at the bar and them toasting and seeing that they are really nothing big in the Shire.

After that I don’t think this movie could have been saved.

I’m sorry but from a fan of the books and the first two movies Jackson blew it in ROTK.

I hope I have not insulted any of you on this board but felt I had to say my peace in the most respectful way.

I welcome any responces to this post as long as they are respectful and not personal attacks.

And I’m still buying the Ring on the chain cause that’s bad ass!

Thanks for your time.

P.S. Am I wrong or didn’t Sam kill Gollum in the book? Cause if so he should of left that in.

PS

You're not only wrong about Sam and Gollum, but wrong about almost everything up there.

Well DONE!

On the Sam and Gollum thing I was wrong, but I knew it was not the way that it was shown in the movie.

Frodo appears and Gollum dances away holding his severed finger in his hand showing off the ring. Gollum wails with joy but jumps astray and slips into the gulf of the mountain plunging into the depths below. Fires explode from within and the mountain begins to rumble. Sam finds Frodo and tries to sop the blood from his maimed hand. Frodo tells him that they must forgive Gollum because he was the only one who could complete the quest.

So I guess Pete and I both have something in common, we both were wrong.

Also, please explain to me how else I was wrong?

As someone who loves the books, and calls herself a Tolkien nerd, im surprised that your this upset with the movie. ALL movies are changed from books to accomodate the big screen as well as audiences. I have my problems with ROTK, as well as FOTR and TTT, but I still love it.

I do disagree with your statement about the movie being about Theoden mostly. I thought we really did see the struggle of Aragorn having to face who he was and come to the throne. Sure Theoden was a big deal, but I dont think it took anything away from Aragorn's storyline.

Goodness! Have you even READ Tolkiens “The Return of the King”? Are you aware, that the entire trilogy was thought as one long book, and the publisher demanded it be split in three? And that Tolkien wanted the last book to be entitled “The war of the Ring”?
IF you read the book, you’ll learn, that the story gets broader, and doesn’t dwell much on neither Aragorn, Gimli or Legolas, but on the entire Gondor situation, as Mordor unleashes its might on the city. The books do not dwell mainly on those three characters. Neither does the movie. What are you complaining about?
This is shown nicely and to the point in the mobvie.
What’s wrong with Jackson taking the liberty of not showing the “Choices af Master Samwise”? All who’ve read the books know Sam took the ring, and your average movie-goer just gets a small surprise.
I have no idea where you get the idea that Sam and Frodo SEEMS to be in love with each other. It’s not in the books, it’s not hinted at, nor acted out – so that’s just in your mind.
Why does Aragorn sing? Why does Pippin sing at the court of Denethor? Maybe you should read Silmarillion? Hm? To understand that Middleearth was created out of song. Read the silly books. They sing – ALL the time in the books.

Gollum got the ring? Smeagol got the ring. No, that was a cinematic piece of brilliance. We get to see how the ring ensnared and transformed Gollum, just as Frodo is slowly giving in to the temptation of the ring – and it sets the stage for the scene in Mount Doom.
If the movie-version stats with Saruman, rotk starts as the end of TT, not as the BEGINNING of rotk.
The “side-story” with Denethor and Faramir EXISTS that late in the trilogy.

Why end the movie where the book doesn’t end – namely as you say on the mountainside? That’s not the way the book ends. That is a nonsense suggestion. How can you say you’re a fan of the books and then demand a different ending to the movie???
The fade had the purpose of showing that to Sam and Frodo THIS was the end. They had both resigned themselves to death – then and there.

Originally posted by JohnMatrix

The movie is called the Return of the King: Yet most of the story is about the King of Rohan(sp?) and his niece and the steward of Gondor(sp?) and his son. The story was barely about Aragorn and him coming back to the throne. There needs to be more time spent on him and his struggle to be the king.

Originally posted by JohnMatrix
In the book I am pretty sure we know that Sam took the ring off the body of Frodo at the moment it happened. I’m also pretty sure Sam used the ring to save Frodo, but I could be wrong.(Just found out i was right, Sam did use the ring) But at any rate, how much better would that scene, where Sam has trouble giving back the ring, if we knew the whole time Frodo was captured Sam had it. (and had used it)

Originally posted by JohnMatrix
Also, cinematically it was the wrong choice to put all your eggs into the first war at the walls of Gondor. For the last two movies you have been featuring the three main characters as Aragorn, Legolas and Gamling, and than you focus on that war where they are not even a part of it until the very end? And their part in that war is over with in a minute. And so you have this huge battle with out your three main guys, in the middle of your film and you still have one major battle to go. And for that last battle you give it a tenth of the time you give the first.

Originally posted by JohnMatrix
Can Sam and Frodo be any more in love with each other? I know there not but the way they acted and the way it was shot tell a different story. A better example than ROTK of male bonding after a life long journey of hardship is “The Shawshank Redemption”.

Originally posted by JohnMatrix
Why does Aragorn become a “Backstreet Boy” when he becomes the King? Perfect hair, clothes and a solo ballad that would put Mariah Carry to shame, he was the perfect King for them cause they could relate to him. Than he becomes king and forgets who he is? The Ranger from the north, that’s what will make him the prefect King he had flaws.

Originally posted by JohnMatrix
Opening scene: We don’t need to know how
Gollum got the ring in the third movie that would have been better in the first.(He should of added more about what happened to Sarumon(sp?), since he was the villain for the first 2 movies.)

Originally posted by JohnMatrix
Cut any shots of the conflict with of the Stewart and his son’s conflict. Don’t need that side story this late in the movies. All we needed to know was the Steward was week and didn’t want to give up the throne.

Originally posted by JohnMatrix
Take a risk, end the movie with Frodo and Sam on the mountainside. Those of us that know what happens still know, those that don’t can feel there sacrifice more. Ok if you don’t want to do that, than don’t fake end it. That just doesn’t make scene. I have never seen that before. Fade to black for 8 secs and come back to the same exact scene. It had no purpose or meaning at all.

Originally posted by JohnMatrix
Ok so you don’t cut it there, you can still save it when everyone kneels to the Hobbits. Perfect time to end it. Ok you don’t want to save it there and you want to change the ending of the book at the Shire ,than save it by cutting it at the bar and them toasting and seeing that they are really nothing big in the Shire.

After that I don’t think this movie could have been saved.

Originally posted by JohnMatrix
I’m sorry but from a fan of the books and the first two movies Jackson blew it in ROTK.

Originally posted by JohnMatrix
I hope I have not insulted any of you on this board but felt I had to say my peace in the most respectful way.

Originally posted by JohnMatrix
P.S. Am I wrong or didn’t Sam kill Gollum in the book? Cause if so he should of left that in.

don't remember for sure, but I think no

just my two cents

Originally posted by The Omega
Goodness! Have you even READ Tolkiens “The Return of the King”? Are you aware, that the entire trilogy was thought as one long book, and the publisher demanded it be split in three? And that Tolkien wanted the last book to be entitled “The war of the Ring”?

Yes, I am

Originally posted by The Omega
IF you read the book, you’ll learn, that the story gets broader, and doesn’t dwell much on neither Aragorn, Gimli or Legolas, but on the entire Gondor situation, as Mordor unleashes its might on the city. The books do not dwell mainly on those three characters. Neither does the movie. What are you complaining about?[/B]

That you can make your three main characters for the first two movies(a choice Jackson made) not the man factor in the third.

and yes the book is very broad and i know that, but unfortunately for movies it to broad and cuts need to be made.

Originally posted by The Omega
What’s wrong with Jackson taking the liberty of not showing the “Choices af Master Samwise”? All who’ve read the books know Sam took the ring, and your average movie-goer just gets a small surprise.[/B]

All i said was there would be a huge pay off if we new that and that little surprise could of be a great point of conflict for Sam and Frodo.

Originally posted by The Omega
I have no idea where you get the idea that Sam and Frodo SEEMS to be in love with each other. It’s not in the books, it’s not hinted at, nor acted out – so that’s just in your mind. [/B]

I disagree, watch Shaw shank i think it was done much better. I know for a fact if that shoot went on for 5 more seconds thier kissing. 😉

Originally posted by The Omega
Why does Aragorn sing? Why does Pippin sing at the court of Denethor? Maybe you should read Silmarillion? Hm? To understand that Middleearth was created out of song. Read the silly books. They sing – ALL the time in the books.[/B]

Again I have read the books, but just cause they sing in the books doesnt mean it has to be in the movie. And if it was soooooo important for them to sing, what about all the songs the missed in the first 2?

Originally posted by The Omega
Gollum got the ring? Smeagol got the ring. No, that was a cinematic piece of brilliance. We get to see how the ring ensnared and transformed Gollum, just as Frodo is slowly giving in to the temptation of the ring – and it sets the stage for the scene in Mount Doom.
[/B]

Than it should of been shown in 1 or 2.

Originally posted by The Omega
Why end the movie where the book doesn’t end – namely as you say on the mountainside? That’s not the way the book ends. That is a nonsense suggestion. How can you say you’re a fan of the books and then demand a different ending to the movie???[/B]

Again i am a fan of the books, but movie wise he made a bad choice. There is a difference.

Originally posted by The Omega
The fade had the purpose of showing that to Sam and Frodo THIS was the end. They had both resigned themselves to death – then and there. [/B]

Your wrong he did cause he want to get a cheap thrill out of making ppl think it was over witch just takes you out of the story and say WTF?

Originally posted by Clockwork
first you say PJ had to cut more out of the movie, but on the other hand, you would a better explanation of Sam and the ring .. well just think that the things you critisize, don't make sense ...

IMO, all he would have to do is show Sam take the ring so we know he has it and that he uses it to get past the three guys instead of the sword fight.

total 20 seconds and it would really show that thier friendship was on the ropes.

Btw, Clockwork great counter post.

How can you claim to’ve read the book, and be in doubt about how Gollum dies???
Skimming does not constitute reading.

Legolas, Gimli and Aragorn are NOT the leading characters of the first three movies. Dare I mention Frodo, Sam, Gandalf, Merry and Pippin… ?? And the AGL-trio features more in the first two books than in the third.

Master Samwise choices: But you DID know that, didn’t you? You read the book. And what surprise ARE YOU talking about?

Your delusion about love between Sam and Frodo: Why should I watch another movie? If something is not IN rotk it’s not in there.
“I know for a fact if that shoot went on for 5 more seconds thier kissing”
Prove that. You say you know for a fact, fine, show me the facts as they are not in the book, nor in the movie.
I’m waiting.

“just cause they sing in the books doesnt mean it has to be in the movie.”
Ehrm, excuse me? You are telling me the movies should not try to copy the books? Why not? It’s an adaptation of the “lord of the rings.”

“Than it should of been shown in 1 or 2.”

Why? The Ring takes the final hold of Frodo in rotk, and the Smeagol/Deagol scene shows what awaits Frodo, if he cannot destroy the ring.

” Again i am a fan of the books, but movie wise he made a bad choice. There is a difference”

You’re not answering my question. Why should the movie have a different ending than the books. The fact the Frodo survives, but NEVER recovers from having carried the ring, is a much deeper and sorrowful ending, than swift death on a mountainside.

” Your wrong he did cause he want to get a cheap thrill out of making ppl think it was over witch just takes you out of the story and say WTF?”

And you know this because???

JOHNMATRIX is about the coolest character outthere other than that though your crazy!!!!

I don't understand how someone cannot like the movie....I've read the books several times, and I can't complain about how PJ did it! I don't think anyone else could've done a better job! 🙄

although its sad but pj couldnt of fit everything you wanted in it, theres just too much, although i would of loved to watch more people that are less fans of the story would not of.

at least pj gives credit to the author as some directors that make films from books dont and he iz a fan himself not someone just outr to make money

Gondor and Rohan used to be really good friends and allies. Over the years, they forgot that and lost contact with each other. The Rohirrim are known for the 2 great charges, one 1000yrs b4 and one at Pelannor Fields. Rohan and Gondor renewed their friendship at the end, it wasn't about Aragorn becoming king, the title is so stupid. Tolkien hated the title too, it told what happend in the book. and would u really want to see aragorn struggle to become king the whole movie? i didn't think so. it's a movie, peeps don't go to see some stupid person struggle, they want action and fun. PJ is the best director ever, shut up.

I just wanted to say that your opinion, JohnMatrix, made me sick to my stomach. And although I know many ppl have all made good points contridicting u, I didn't read them all. I didn't want them to sway what I have to say.

First of all: If any fool has read the LOTR (the entire book, yes it is one book) u will know that Tolkien loved putting poems and songs into the books. In fact one of my favorite parts of the book is when the hobbits first get to Rivendell and Bilbo and Aragorn go and write a song. Aragorn sings MANY times!!!! And why do u have a problem with it now when he sang in FOTR also, why should this movie be any differant?

Second: As for the movie focusing too much on everyone other than our "heros", I say have u never heard anything Tolkien has said about the book? He never, I repeat never, wanted the book to be called Return of the King. The book is not about just Aragorn! He is not the all important character! And I think contrary to ur opinion Aragorn shines in the movie. He is the king and u see his struggle with it. The Paths of the Dead was one of my favorite scenes!

Third: Sam and Frodo do love one another. Notin any way, shape, or form in a wrong way. They are soulmates as someone said earlier. They understand each other in a way that u can apparently not comprihend. They are the true love story of the book, and that love is the love of a true friend. And if u are so immature as to make fun of it then I feel sorry for u.

U amaze me with ur opinion that the movie needs to be cut down, but what u think is important needs to be added. Who made u peter jackson. Since u apparantly loved the first two movies, I am amazed that u lost all faith in him and are critizing almost every aspect of his masterpeice. You need to grow up, stop throwing ur temper tantrum and look around. There are bigger fans out there who know more about the books and movies than u, don't goade them into a fight. They are mean, trust me. 😉

The Paths of the Dead was one of my favorite scenes

I enjoied the look on Aragorns face when he said the line wasn't broken. It was the first time in the movie when u knew he was taking up the crown. 🙂

lol, well finally.

😄

lol.

John Matrix you are definitely a very pathetic imbecile and you should have your eyes gouged out, your nose smashed, eyelids sewed shut, fingers cut off, kidneys stabbed, ears cut off, elbows and knee caps hit with a sledge hammer, Head set on fire, and your soul taken away by me personally.

Burn in Hell you hopeless maggot.

😈