Book

Movie
Director: Peter Jackson | Released: 2003
Screen Play: Fran Walsh
Starring: Vigo Mortensen, Ian McKellan, Elijah Wood, John Rhys-Davies, Orlando Bloom, Andy Serkis

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the Kings is the final chapter of J.R.R. Tolkien’s LOR series. Like its predecessors, the movie has a fair share of accurate portrayals of the book’s journey, and throws in its own elements as well. It is hard to argue against the book or film, unless you want to argue against one of the most beloved authors of all time or groundbreaking, record-shattering filmmaking. Still, like most stories passed down through the ages, The Return of the King has changed with the times. And if for nothing else, we can set the record straight here and now…
Time Lapse
One of the bigger differences in timing shows through when High Elf Elrond (Hugo Weaving) delivers Anduril, the fabled sword to cut the ring from Sauron’s hand, to Aragorn. In Tolkien’s version, Aragorn has the sword far earlier. About two books earlier. Jackson uses the sword as a climactic shift in Aragorn’s temperament. After receiving the sword, he starts acting like king–breaking hearts and kicking even more arse.

Long Live the…Pimp?
As I have mentioned in my reviews of The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers, there is much more romance in the screen adaptations of Tolkien’s story. In this movie, director Peter Jackson includes many dream elements for Aragorn (Vigo Mortensen) and Arwen (Liv Tyler). Their star-crossed love is magnified in the movie, whereas in the book you can hardly feel its presence. Jackson’s nurturing of the love story is an interesting interpretation of the original work, and it made me miss not seeing more of it in Tolkien’s writing. Tolkien focused far more on the journey of Aragorn and Ring-Bearer Frodo (Elijah Wood).

 Also, the lady Eowyn’s affection for Aragorn is exagerrated in the movie. In the movie she is a passionate woman devoted to her father, King of Rohan, her people, and Aragorn. The book portrays her much more of an Amazonian warrior, and her affection towards Aragorn is only suggested, rather than made into a mini soap opera.

Chopping Block
Jackson made some precise choices in making the film. Like I’ve mentioned, he wanted to focus heavily on the love stories. He also wanted to cut out new characters to focus on ones that were already established. Characters such as Beregrond, a citidel soldier, and the Dunedain, Aragorn’s kinsmen, didn’t make the final cut. Beregrond had lengthy scenes with Pippin inside of Gundor’s walls. He represents the strength of Gondor’s people and the attitudes of its soldiers. The Dunedain are Aragorns kinsmen and valiant warriors. They met Aragorn and rode with him through the Dimalt Road (Road of the Dead) in the book, but in the movie it was only Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas who accompanied him on the perilous road to the City of the Damned.

Though I didn’t really miss Beregrond in the movie, the Dunedain created a more realistic feel for medieval battle, whereas in the movie you get the feeling that it is one man versus an army throughout the saga. To be fair, though, the addition of the Dunedain made it difficult to learn the new characters and follow some of the plot lines, but only minorly.

Jackson also cut much of the action following the epic battle at Gondor. After the enemy is beaten back, there are chapters dedicated to the recovery of the survivors–mainly Merry and Eowyn. This is also the time where we watch Faramir court Eowyn, whereas in the movie this is totally left out. Tolkien also includes a history behind the Great White Tree–Gundor’s symbol and the mythical plant signifying the days of the King. Jackson includes the tree, but not with the depth that Tolkien provides. Tolkien’s details help create a history to Gundor and a sense of majesty to the return of the king, whereas the movie assumes much of these sentiments.

There are many cuts the movie makes. Some of the larger ones include: Aragorn’s staring battle with Sauron through one of the seeing stones is cut from the film; orc squabbling in the guard tower where Frodo is kept prisoner; much of Frodo and Sam’s (Sean Astin) adventures through Mordor.

It is also important to mention that the book and movie start at different points. The movie opens up with a flashback of Smeagol murdering his kinsmen for the One Ring; whereas the book upons up on the precipice of war with Gandalf and Pippin travelling to Gondor. Also, Jackson gives Pippin a singing scene…which I could have done without.

Bird-Eye Vs. First Person
Beating the dead horse, I have to mention one final time the differences in perspectives Tolkien and Jackson use in their versions of the LOR story. Tolkien prefers to deliver the story from a much larger point of view when describing battles, landscapes, and the characters’ journies. Jackson focuses much more heavily upon his cast. He uses cinematography to show an entire army storming the castle in the climactic battle, but you really watch the action unfold from the eyes of Gandalf (Ian McKellan), Aragorn, Frodo, and the supporting cast.

Reflection
In my opinion, the book and the film are equally worth viewing. Nobody can describe a landscape, or create an alternate reality, quite like J.R.R. Tolkien. It’s a brilliant art form long forgotten. Peter Jackson did an equisite job throughout the saga in visually representing the landscapes and creating an epic sized journey. He also did a great job at staying true to Tolkien’s vision when it counted. Frodo’s scene at Mount Doom; Aragorn’s storming of the Black Gate, and many other vital scenes were left in tact and represented honestly. 

The movies are wonderful companions for the books, but to be truly immersed in Middle-Earth, you are going to have to read Tolkien’s work. It is hefty reading, but truly rewarding.  Now that I think of it, Jackson created nine hours of film to represent the three books, so both are pretty lengthy but well worth the commitment.

Movie:
Director: Peter Jackson
Screenplay: Fran Walsh, etc.
Starring: Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, Viggo Mortensen, Orlando Bloom, Bernard Hill, Ian McKellan, John Rhys-Davies
Release: December 2002

The Two Towers is the second installation of J.R.R. Tokien’s Lord of the Rings saga. Director Peter Jackson took greater departures from this book than the previous adaptation in part one, The Fellowship of the Ring. He seems to have stuck to his award-winning formula, in that he added more conflict, and romance than Tolkien focused on in the book. Some of the risks Jackson took were difficult to swallow and even nudging up to cheesy for commercial fans, let alone stout Tolkien fanboys. Besides adding some soap-opera elements to the film, Jackson decided to play Jenga with Tolkien’s sequence of events as well.

Because I have not yet read the third and final book, The Return of the King, I can not definitively say whether every “extra” scene Jackson added that I did not find in the book was pulled from his own bag of tricks or bumped up from Return of the King. Maybe you can fill in some gaps for me. But, if you take a look at Fellowship and Two Towers movies, you’ll notice that he as already staggered Tolkien’s story and criss-crossed some parts from each. But, being that I haven’t read anything about Frodo (Elijah Wood) running out into the open and offering the Ring of Power to Nazgul (the enemy) in Two Towers, I’m about 99% sure Jackson conjured this up for a little dramatic flair. But let me back up and start at the beginning.

Split Personality
Along their path to Mordor, Frodo and Sam (Sean Astin) are tied up and taken prisoner by Faramir, captain of Gondor. Simple, right? Wrong. And here’s where Jackson starts playing with Tolkien’s vision. In the book they are not bound and taken as prisoners, but led by mutual agreement to Faramir’s lair. In the book, Faramir finds out the Frodo is carrying the Ring of Power through Sam; whereas Gollum (Frodo and Sam’s guide) gives up the big secret of Frodo’s parcel in the movie.

Faramir knows some lore about the Rings of Power, but his knowledge is different in the film and movie. In the book he knows about a powerful trinket-not a ring per se-that has the power to fully restore Lord Sauron’s destructive powers. But, in the movie he knows the lore of the Rings of Power. In both he finds out Frodo is carrying the One Ring, but in the book he is not corrupted by temptation and sets Frodo free (with vital provisions!)

Unfortunately, Jackson decided it’d be more exciting for Faramir to be hypnotized by the One Ring and steal Frodo to Gondor-to use the One Ring against Sauron. Now, since Faramir is supposed to be educated in the history of the One Ring that deceives the human race to the ruin time and time again…why would he opt to bring it to men? So, rather than Frodo leaving Faramir with a new friend and fresh food, he is kept-and in turn enemies find Frodo and come within a claw’s grasp of ripping the One Ring out of Frodo’s outstretched hand.

This leads to another major point. Jackson’s interpretation of Frodo makes him far more corrupted than Tolkien’s. At times in the movie, Frodo wants to be taken by the enemy. In the book, the Ring takes Frodo over at times. Frodo is considerably stronger in the book: in his manner of speak when talking to Faramir; when battling the seduction of the One Ring; and in dealing with Sam, his companion.

Stop Hitting Yourself
Continuing these observations of Jackson’s disregard for Tolkien’s subtle characters, Gollum is an absolute lunatic in the movie. A true on-screen drama queen. He has a full-blown split personality: a frothing, fuming monster willing to kill anything to get the One Ring back; and the gentler Smeagol, Frodo’s faithful lap dog. The audience watches several monologues/dialogues of these characters choosing Frodo’s fate. The mean side chastises the soft side like a bully straight out of 6^th grade. In the book, Gollum is much more steady. He grumbles about the journey, but he leads on. Readers catch on to his plot in the same scene as the movie-but he seems far less deranged-but equally maniacal.

Frodo, as stated earlier, is far more wretched in the film. Jackson does well in paralleling Frodo and Gollum as the same character (but 500 years different in age). But, this leads to Frodo treating Sam like the whipping boy in the film; whereas in the book they are still very much companions. But, in all fairness, the little love triangle between Frodo, Sam and Gollum is something to behold. Better than watching soaps (way better special effects).

Three’s Company
Just like Jackson’s effort to insert romance in Fellowship of the Ring, he continues Aragorn’s (Viggo Mortenssen) and Arwen’s (Liv Tyler) romance in Two Towers. Though Tolkien gives us very little to go on in the book, Jackson spends a chunk of time on sweet sappy reminisces-and in Two Towers he adds a third party: Eowyn of the House of Rohan. Though this is (up to this point) unfounded in Tolkien’s books, Aragorn and Arwen, who once were an item; broke up because he is human and she is elf (cue waterworks here). Enter human lady, Eowyn. Eowyn instantly falls in love with Aragorn (of course), but Aragorn wants his elf-lady back (of course!) All Jackson is missing to solidify this as a big-screen soap is extreme close-ups of overly dramatic facial expressions and Susan Luchey. Alas, in all fairness, Tolkien’s story has a faint heartbeat and it’s hard to blame Jackson for trying to give the girls more screen time. A major deviation, but arguably makes the story more well-rounded.

Battle of the Beards
Other major drama that Jackson adds is a wizard duel. Gandalf (Ian McKlellan) tries to break Saruman’s spell over Theoden, King of Rohan (Bernard Hill). The “battle” is a mental one, where they exchange words (Saruman speaks through Theoden telepathically), and Gandalf triumphs by removing Saruman’s presence and restoring Theoden to a healthy, conscious state.

Jackson loves adding wizard duels in the movies, though Tolkien takes a more subtle approach in the novel. In fact, Tolkien holds a brain-duel between these two wizards in Two Towers, but it is in no way related to the duel mentioned above. In the book, Gandalf and Saruman meet face to face after Saruman’s tower, Orthanc, falls at the hands of begrudged Ents (in lamens, walking trees). Saruman tries to persuade Theoden and Gandalf to befriend him and take over the world. But, Gandalf wins, breaks his staff, and leaves the broken wizard to rot in his tower. It’s a pretty intense bit of the book.

All in all Jackson did not create a bad movie. The Two Towers is packed with action and drama, and he vividly portrays the major battles accurately. But, he starts to seriously break off from the books in the movie. The endings are very different, placing all the characters at different points in the journey, and I just do not know where the third and final chapter, Return of the King is going to go. Stay tuned.

Book

Movie:
Director: Peter Jackson
Screenplay: Fran Walsh
Starring: Elijah Wood, Viggo Mortensen, Ian McKellan, Orlando Bloom
Release: 2001Rating: PG-13

It was only a matter of time before someone made a film of The Fellowship of the Ring, J.R. Tolkien’s first book of the The Lord of the Rings trilogy. The story is a masterpiece. The characters each have their own plight and rite of passage. The conflict and journey are epic. But it’s a slippery slope to try and adapt a timeless story such as this for the big screen. To quote a character from the story, “Stray but a little and you will fail.” Fortunately, Tolkien proves to be a wonderful guide in his wizardry and craft, and paved a clear path for director Peter Jackson and screen writer Fran Walsh. All they had to do was follow the map.

It should be noted that Tolkien did not completely render every nook and cranny of his saga. To detail every hillside or facial feature of characters or elven craftsmanship in their weapons would have taken a lifetime-and he had bills to pay. Rather, he used broad strokes for such things, letting the reader fill in the gaps. This is where the movie comes into play, and for the most part movie is a wonderful compliment to the book.

To go one step further, the screen writer did a wonderful job of creating little scenes here and there that reward the Tolkien fan club. For instance, we find the main character, Frodo (Elijah Wood) and his companions sitting under what looks to be monsters carved into stone. These statues, however, are actually a trolls turned to stone in the saga’s prequel, The Hobbit. But, for every nuance added, there was one taken away.

Director’s Cuts
Tolkien had a wild imagination and a classic style. So, when the journey sets out, it passes through several common scenarios that we see in many stories, but with Tolkien’s fantastical flair. The Lord of the Rings is a fantasy sci-fi story at heart, but Tolkien at times may have gone too far for the average movie-goer.

For example, Frodo quickly finds that he is being chased along his journey, and flees to a dark, treacherous forest-which is a standard writer’s tool for confusion and/or evil (classic style). While traveling through the Old Forest, Frodo and his hobbit companions are entranced and Sam Gamgee (Sean Astin) and Pippin (Billy Boyd) are engulfed by a carnivorous tree (enter Tolkien’s imagination). But a man-of-the-wood named Tom Bombadil beats the tree with the power of song.

The movie skips over the perils of the Old Forest entirely. But, I can see how the director might foresee the average audience finding a hobbit-eating tree bested by a singing, skipping woodlander a bit too much sci-fi. Instead Jackson simplified the formula: Sauron, Ringwraiths and orcs are the bad guys; hobbits, humans, elves, dwarfs are the good guys.

To expand on the concept of eliminating songs from the movie, there are many poems and songs excluded from the movie. In practically every chapter of The Fellowship of the Ring someone’s singing an old story or working on a new lyric. It’s not surprising that they were left out, though, as the movie has to keep its mainstream appeal, and people probably wouldn’t care much to hear the actors’ vocals. Unfortunately, stripping the movie of songs and rhymes leads to several scene changes, and some interesting lore. None of the “filler” for the missing songs damage the story, and they fit well enough with the journey’s flow.

Live By The Sword
The book is also far less violent and alludes to conflict much more than it embeds the audience in it. The wizard battle between Gandalf (Ian McKellen) and Saruman (Christopher Lee) in the tower Isengard is an exaggerated version of Gandalf and Saruman’s quarrel and Gandalf’s capture. Also, how Gandalf escapes is twisted to eliminate the introduction of another character (a beast-master wizard named Radagast).

In the climax of the movie a final battle on the hillside of Amon Hen claims the life of Boromir (Sean Bean) in a valant effort to regain his honor in sacrificing his life for the sake of his hobbit companions. Meanwhile, Frodo and Sam flee the fellowship to seek their fate alone. In the book Tolkien leaves us with only Frodo’s path, as Boromir’s final stand is not revealed yet.  The movie provides a rewarding climax, however, and it is not totally unfounded. The second book, The Two Towers, records the battle on Amon Hen.

Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), a classic hero character, is a lost hero looking for strength within. Tolkien gives us a glimpse of Aragorn’s impotence and refusal to lead, but in the movie he is much quicker to grow into the leader. The biggest change for Aragorn, in my opinion, is Anduril, his sword and heirloom. In the book, he carries a broken hilt in his sheath. This is the heirloom that he seeks to remake one day upon the rise of the human race, and it is remade into Anduril, the blade that defeated the evil Sauron in the Battle for Middle-Earth. In the movie, the sword is found in the elven city Rivendell, where it lays broken in shards.

The movie couldn’t afford to have Aragorn not fighting, so he needed to have some sword, if not the mythical Anduril-but in the book he has no need for a sword as of yet. The battle with the Nine Ringwraiths on Weathertop is one of the few instances where he fights for his companions, he used torches-but in the movie he used torch and blade.

Love Conquers Author
The movie makes way for a strong female character and love interest, in yet another attempt to create a blockbuster event out of Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings saga. Arwen (Liv Tyler) saves Frodo from certain doom on the way to Rivendell. With her aid the Ringwraiths are washed away in a flood she commanded with her elf craft, and Frodo is healed by the elf elder, Elrond (Hugo Weaving). While Frodo heals, Aragorn and Arwen share moments of forsaken love between human and elf, but in the book they hardly speak. Rather an elf named Glorfindel saves Frodo and his horse rides Frodo across to safety where Elrond and Gandalf create the flood. But, there’s always room for romance, even if a little re-writing is in order.

In a funny way, you could say that Samwise Gamgee (Sean Astin) and Frodo are also a couple. Sam is bound to Frodo as his servant. In the book their relationship is much like this: Sam calls Frodo master regularly and follows him with the loyalty of a dog. In the movie they make sure to not use the word master, and replace the servant-master relationship with one of love and commitment.

Whether or not all the little changes add up and destroy the book’s foundation, or if you believe that taking something old and making something new is the best way to treat Tolkien’s classic, the movie does do most of the book justice. Gandalf’s final battle, the temptation of Galadriel (Cate Blanchett), personification of the One Ring, Bilbo’s (Ian Holm) corruption, and countless other parts of the book are represented with outstanding accuracy. Unfortunately, a lot of back story and references to the prequel, The Hobbit are lost, but as a whole it is a testament to the book.