(Spoiler Caution) I am back, and late, but ... some opinions of mine on TTT

[jdavis]

I figure that Arwin will fill the role of her brothers and all the Rangers of the North (who will get cut out completly) and bring Aragorn the sword after the battle at Helm's Deep at Isengard. That is where that scene fits and that is most likely where she will show up. If she had shown up at Helm's Deep I probably would of gotten up and walked out, not because I don't like her or because I think she is getting too much time but because that is just too big a change to what happened in the books, not to mention it would of totally ruined the Aragorn/ Eowin relationship (one of my favorite parts of the books) well before it was supposed to be resolved. Arwin would of been a needless distraction to a already overly busy part of the movie. She will probably get 5 minutes or so of her delivering the sword at the start of ROTK that will be dedicated to advancing the love story and will not have all the other distractions going on around it. And I do feel that the way he left it was as 100% cliffhanger for the start of the 3rd movie. People who never read the books are now wondering if she left and Aragorn will "hook up" with Eowin.

I didn't care for the Elrond scenes not for how he interacted with Arwin but how he interacted with Galadriel, it made her look like she was subordinate to him and asking him for advice, shouldn't he be asking her for advice?

As far as Gandalf is concerned, I am not sure why that bothers you so much, I saw it as "Oh Gandalf's back." and went on, people I went to the movie with that had never read the book thought that he didn't die, that he was going to die but was saved/ willed himself not to die. I understand what you are saying and I can see your point but I didn't see how it would of affected most of th audience like that (You have to remember the vast majority of the people out there, including most of the casual "I read that book when I was little" people don't have a clue that Sauron and Gandalf are in any way related at all. You have to dig sort of deep to learn all that.) Most people won't have any confusion due to the fact that they don't know why it would be confusing and the die hard fans of Tolkien know better. Gandalf could of just said " Oh I won, and I got Saruman's job title (and color) now, he got fired from the Wizards order". That's how most people took it anyway. I'm not saying this trying to be a ass, it's basically what I got from people who I talked to that never read the books. Gandalf didn't die after all and now he is the head of the wizards order instead of Saruman. If he had tried to go any deeper then he would of started to confuse people.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

JDavis, I think you have it right concerning Gandalf.
And certainly, I am not hearing complaints about Gandalf's return; it would appear audiences are happy with what they saw.
I certainly could go for the idea that Gandalf did not die, but simply had such a will to live (for the good of his friends, if for no other reason) that he ... lived!

I must respectfully disagree with you concerning Arwen.
I think her appearance at Helm's Deep would have strengthened the story.
However ...
The fact you state you would have walked out, had Arwen appeared, is important. Very important. It is the reason Peter Jackson cut out Arwen at Helm's Deep, I believe.
Because the majority of the fans appear to agree with you, JDavis, and disagree with me, and they let Peter Jackson know how they felt.

Peter Jackson wanted to please the fans (or so he says!) and I would guess fan input affected what he cut from the film ... in other words, he cut Arwen out because the majority of people, like yourself, did not wish to see her there.
And that's fine. It's still a great film, I think. From the point of view of most people, it is a better film, and not a worse film, for the cutting of Arwen.

Heh. I just happen to think otherwise. But that's me!

Obviously, time constraints also played a large role in the cut.

I do know that Peter Jackson originally filmed the scenes of Arwen at Helm's Deep.
Although this was cut, it is still to Peter Jackson's credit (in my opinion) that he originally portrayed her as going out of love, and not out of a desire for glory and renown. Had he done that, I would have been disgusted.
Glory and renown in battle were more along the line of thinking of the Rohirrim, including Eowyn, but most certainly not to the wise daughter of Elrond Half-Elven.

 

[jdavis]

Jackson has a real fine line to walk with what he does in the movies and he will not please everybody. I do not have a problem at all with the love story (of course I thought he should dump her and go with Eowin when I read the book). I think it will be just as dramatic a scene to start off ROTK with her showing up at Isengard with Narsil instead of leaving Middle Earth, not to mention it fufills the role of getting the sword there without having to introduce more bit characters. It fits the time in the books better than her showing up at Helm's Deep, they already had a Elves showing up at Helm's Deep scene, two of them might of seemed a little much. And yes I'm sure alot of people would of been mad if she showed up, that's just too big a departure from the books for plot development that can be done a little later and still fit the basic timeline of the books.

Edit: moved part of what I wrote to the ROTK thread where it makes more sense.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

I think there is hope that something big (read dramatic and entertaining) is going to happen with Aragorn because in both films now out there is repeated reference to Aragorn's inner strength.

In the book, Tolkien made a point of referring to that strength as the reason Aragorn could hold his people together, as they raced for Pelagir, and that strength enabled Aragorn to command the Dead (along with his being the heir of Isildur), and maybe perhaps that strength was required to even take the Paths of the Dead in the first place.
That strength came to it's full power when Aragorn came to the field of Gondor, and swept out Anduril, Narsil reforged as deadly as of old, and lead the onslaught against the Hosts of Mordor.
Or, at least, that is my impression. Aragorn's inner strength, as it were, played a tremendous part in winning the Battle of Gondor.

Peter Jackson refers to Aragorn's strength in various ways in the films FOTR and TTT.
Perhaps Peter Jackson will run with this theme of Tolkien's, and make something really memorial out of it.

If Arwen does show up now, at Helm's Deep after the battle, with Narsil, I am guessing (shrugs) that she does go with him on the Paths of the Dead.
THAT will be a change to Tolkien's story, if true, but yes, it will certainly show Arwen's love for Aragorn! The Paths of the Dead were no place for the faint of heart! (And, for what it is worth, I think Tolkien's (not Peter Jackson's) Elrond would kill Aragorn with his own hands rather than allow Aragorn to drag his daughter on such a dark Road.)
If Arwen shows up and goes with Aragorn, that rules out Eowyn going - and Eowyn did not go, in the books, despite wanting to quite a lot.
I would daresay that Aragorn was rather chavaunistic (and out of character) in his treatment of Eowyn on this matter, in the book, but if Arwen shows up now (in the film) enough justification exists right there, to the film audience, for Eowyn being denied the Paths of the Dead.

 

[Squire James]

I dunno, Legolas didn't really consider the Paths a big deal at all, so perhaps neither would Elrond or Arwen. Elrond (either version) would definitely have more problems with his daughter being with Aragorn at all than her walking the Paths of the Dead!

I gather that, if the Arwen scene at Helm's Deep was left in, it would have been her replacing Haldir like she did Glorifindel before (without the death scene, obviously!). I wouldn't have walked out of the theatre, but it would have been a bigger "headscratcher" than the Faramir scene to me. If the plot were to diverge this far from the books, she might have made more sense sitting on Treebeard's shoulder reciting the "river" verse again to cause Isengard to be flooded (since causing floods seems to be what she's good at)!

When I watched the movie, I could almost spot "insert Extended DVD material here" sections. It skipped around an awful lot. It will be interesting to see what gets built in the end.

 

[Squire James]

As for the resurrection issue, it should be noted that there's NOTHING in the story that indicates Sauron is actually dead! Gandalf said something like "his fall would be so low that none could foresee his ever rising again", but unforseen things have been known to happen!

Maia are not all just their body, as Sauron (and Gandalf) had demonstrated before. As Tom Bombadil would put it, Sauron and Moria's Balrog are just "running around naked on the grass for a while". Next time, they dress for success!