Allanon said:
I've watched all of the extended material of all three movies where Philipa, Jackson and the actors try to defend some of the changes, but none of them really give any good reasons. I won't argue about leaving out the scouring. Nor the removal of Bombadil. But why does everyone considers FotR EE the best of the three movies? Simple, because Jackson added the least amount of own material to the story.
I more or less agree. I've followed the commentaries (haven't finished the RotK one yet though) from PJ, Phillipa and Fran, simply because I was interested in hearing their excuses for, ahem, butchering the story.
One of the biggest changes that really irritated me in the movie was having Frodo send Sam away. They stated two reasons for it: 1) there wasn't enough drama in the Cirith Ungol scenes, and 2) they wanted Frodo to go into Shelob's tunnel alone. The thing is I don't really buy either argument.
More drama? Do they mean more of the hyper-emotional overacting that gets a bit jarring at times? I could have done without that. And yeah, I know nothing really happens for much of Sam and Frodo's journey in the book. That might make for a dull movie experience, but I find the cinematic inventions designed to heighten the drama, i.e., the Osgiliath side trek and Sam being sent home to be such a glaringly huge departure from the story that I
can't suspend disbelief enough to enjoy them on their own.
They say having Frodo going into Shelob's lair alone makes it more suspenseful or scary or something. Exactly what was wrong with the original, i.e. Gollum guides them into the lair, and then disappears? How would that not work? See, that's my problem with some of these changes. One minor change is made and maybe it's not a bad change, but then it snowballs creatively, and they find themselves making more and more changes and some of those changes really alter the story.
I also don't like the fact that Denethor is a power crazed lunatic through the movie either, but then he's a minor character, and they don't really have the time to develop the character.
Some people find Tolkien's writing dull, boring whatever. I have to say though, that some of the scenes and dialog he wrote comes off pretty powerfully on screen. There are places in all three movies where PJ gets the stuff right, and it shines. That's what make some of the invented stuff seem so bad, because it doesn't really mesh well with the original stuff.
Gimli losing the drinking contest? Bah. Yuck. God, I hated seeing that. They should have left that scene out. I don't have anything against Orlando, but I got so sick of seeing him protraying some ridiculous uber-elf in these movies. Man, PJ is such an elf fanboy that he lets Legolas shoot him!
Why'd they leave Gothmog's death out of the theatrical release? They built him up to be such a hateful, despicable character, that the audience would have definitly cheered there. I haven't gotten this far in the commentary track, so maybe it will be explained.
