Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Brudewollen" data-source="post: 517776" data-attributes="member: 2274">Shelob has to be there...why else focus on the Phial of Galadrial (and only the Phial of Galadrial) in the abreviated "Gift Giving" sequence if Shelob won't be there.  As for one person's concern that putting it in the 3rd movie will mess up Tolkien's structure, this argument doesn't hold water either.  The publisher of the books essentially messed up Tolkien's original intended structure when he split the series into 3 books from the single volume Tolkien had originally intended.  The books where split somewhat arbatrairly (with Tolkien's grudging conscent) at places that made the best sense and based on the length of the books.Tolkien saw the books as one continuous story, not 3 (or 6 - like the book breaks in the middle of each volume).  Tolkien could just as easily have ended the 2nd book with the Hobbits watching the armies leaving Minas Morgul, after the Tower of Cirith Ungol, or some other section.  Instead he chose to put the break after Shelob.  The meaning will still be there, but you'll just have to wait a year for its compleation.Also, I think it will work better for the Gollum character.  He will now be a more major character in two movies.  If we had Shelob in the 2nd movie, he would hardly appear in the third and then suddenly, like a deus ex machina (well, he sort of was) he'll appear at the Sammath Naur to do his business with the Ring.  It just won't work structurally for the third movie, I don't think.</blockquote>

Verification