Grr. Return of the King makes me angry.

[Storm Raven]

That's pretty consistent with their previous behavior:
GANDALF: "You're carrying around the most dangerous artifact in existence, forged of pure EV-IL."
FRODO: "Well, I guess I should get moving sometime in the next couple weeks, then, eh?"
GANDALF: "Well, there's no real hurry. You should futz around here for a few months at least. Give your dim friend Peregrine time to catch on."

For me, personally, that was the biggest leap in the entire book. Dwarves, dragons, nazgul, no problem. But that level of stupidity is absurd.

Well, he does actually explain why they don't go instantly: Gandalf doesn't want Frodo to arouse suspicion with his departure, and thus possibly alert Sauron's agents that he has the Ring. At that point in the story, Sauron doesn't know that Frodo has the Ring (or at least they believe he doesn't know), and Gandalf believes that a sudden disappearance would put a big flashing neon sign over Frodo's head saying "Ring of Power here, come and get it".

So instead, Frodo comes up with a cover story, sells his house, and moves to the edge of the Shire, where his departure won't be so obvious. It makes some sense in that context, although it makes no sense if you make the contrary assumption that Sauron knows that Frodo has the Ring.

 

[Storm Raven]

Let's be a little more precise - Peter Jackson and the other individuals who adapted the screenplay thought differently than you did about what was important, and what should have priority in a mass-media movie.

There is no one objective "this is what is important about this book". Each reader or audience member can and will think different things are "what is important". If it were otherwise, there would be no such thing as literary analysis - if there were one Truth, you wouldn't need umpteen people dissecting a work. There is only "What I find to be important".

Not true. In this case we have a pretty good idea of what was important about the book, because Tolkien left behind a significant legacy of essays and commentary concerning his work, and discussed at length the various themes and issues in the book. Now, you might try and argue that Tolkien's vision for the work is merely subjective and thus is only as good as anyone else's, but I think you'd have a tough row to hoe on that.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

With regards to...

Although I do agree with you, I think you also need to consider the author's intent -- what the author intended to be important -- and if it can be argued that there is something resembling a Truth-with-a-capital-T, then surely it would be that intent ..

and...

...In this case we have a pretty good idea of what was important about the book, because Tolkien left behind a significant legacy of essays and commentary concerning his work, and discussed at length the various themes and issues in the book. Now, you might try and argue that Tolkien's vision for the work is merely subjective and thus is only as good as anyone else's, but I think you'd have a tough row to hoe on that.

There's a strong case to be made that an author's intent represents only a portion of what actually makes it into a work (barring some forms of modern "art" which are apparently all about intent, though I would argue it is merely the cynical intent to make money off an out-of-control elitist system. But that's a rant for another time and place)

As someone mentioned earlier, Tolkien himself denied any intent to allegory, yet it's certainly there. If we take him at his word, that wasn't strictly intentional. Or take Shakespeare. Some of his plays are DENSE. All manner of subtext and interesting psychology. But if you told me he had any siginificant intent other than to write a successful play, I'd laugh at you.

There are all manner of things in the book that are significant to Tolkien that may be outside his intent whilst writing. And there are other themes he probably tossed in for dramatic or historic reasons that are equally important to others, even if they were merely a plot device to J.R.R. As such, "Tolkien's vision for the work" IS subjective. And, while certainly instructive, his own writings are merely a starting point from which to talk about the "important" elements of the book. But they are hardly necessary or sufficient.

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

And how would that be done in a way that it is remotely believable? After all, we *see* Miranda Otto on the horse, don't we?

How about by not *showing* Miranda Otto on the horse? By not giving a close-up of her face? By not showing Merry's idiotic expression when he sees that it's her?

EDIT: My hat of those who think they know more about a book than the author know no limit

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Boy I'm glad I never watched the theatrical version.

Flexor - Still waiting for the EE.

 

[Zaukrie]

Quote:While I do see valid points and the likely reasoning behind them on both sides of each argument, can we at least agree that the one person who would have best to adapt the story for the screen has been dead for over 30 years and that the one living person that would have been most capable of the aforementioned adaption widely known to have desire that these films had never come into existence.

Nope, we can't agree on that. JRR was a writer, not a movie screen writer. I can no more assume that he would be successful at making a movie than I can at believing a pro athlete can automatically become a successful coach.

 

[Storm Raven]

Nope, we can't agree on that. JRR was a writer, not a movie screen writer. I can no more assume that he would be successful at making a movie than I can at believing a pro athlete can automatically become a successful coach.

Sure, but with the wealth of material out there discussing the books, it probably would have been a good idea to try to bring some of the subtext to the film in more focus. There's a reason the books are among the most successful and enduring works published in the 20th Century, and it's not just because they are a big adventure story.

 

[Vocenoctum]

You're right though, in that it would have been neat to somehow include that moment of doubt. Still, most of what you mentioned was in there.. or are you saying it should have been done differently?

I think more could have been done to show the WitchKing as important. In the movies, there's really not a lot to fear from the wraiths. They get driven off by a torch, a river, some chick in mensware...

 

[Zaukrie]

I have to admit I thought the ringwraiths were wimpy in the movie. If you had only seen the movie, I'm not sure why you would really fear them. I don't remember them hurting anyone other than stabbing Frodo and running over the poor guard gate.

 

[Pants]

How about by not *showing* Miranda Otto on the horse? By not giving a close-up of her face? By not showing Merry's idiotic expression when he sees that it's her?

EDIT: My hat of those who think they know more about a book than the author know no limit

Given that Dernhelm speaks in both the movie and the book, there's pretty much no way to keep her identity secret.

Nope, we can't agree on that. JRR was a writer, not a movie screen writer. I can no more assume that he would be successful at making a movie than I can at believing a pro athlete can automatically become a successful coach.

Also, JRRT said that if his books were ever filmed, they'd need to be changed. Only thing is, he wanted to make the changes himself. Pretty hard to do that now...

I have to admit I thought the ringwraiths were wimpy in the movie. If you had only seen the movie, I'm not sure why you would really fear them. I don't remember them hurting anyone other than stabbing Frodo and running over the poor guard gate.

In FotR the book... what did they really do? They pretty much sucked it up until Bree and even then...

Farmer Maggot chased them off. A bunch of hippy elves chased one off. Aragorn with a torch chased the WK and a bunch of the others off. Gandalf shot light at them and they ran off. Legolas downed one with a single arrow.
Don't get me wrong, they chilled the hell outa me when I first read the books, but what they actually did was another story; they screamed and ran away from a lot of things.