Support NeoGAF

[Kung Fu Jedi]

HIJACK -- Does the Extended Edition feature the scenes where, upon arrival in the Shire, the Hobbits find that the village has been invaded by pirates (or whatever... read the book a long time ago)?

No. Captain Jack Sparrow is no where in sight.

The Scouring of the Shire was left out of the movie for a lot of reasons, so no that scene isn't in. For the record, it wasn't Pirates. It was a band of ruffians, led by "Sharky" who was actually Saruman, extracting some revenge on the Hobbits.

 

[GhaleonEB]

The Balrogs are one of my favorite elements in Middle-Earth. I remember when I was a kid, scouring the History of Middle-Earth appendicies (by Christopher Tolkien) for any mention of the Balrogs. Scary SOBs.

One detail I really wish was in the movie was Legolas totally losing it when they realized a Balrog was upon them. ("Ai! Ai! A Balrog is come!") The elves, in particular the Firstborn and those close to them, know what it means to run into one. It's implied that Legolas gets it when they do a shot of him utterly terrified when Gandolf says it's a Balrog, but I wanted him to freak out a bit for effect.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

Yeah, the Balrogs are indeed bad ass. I remeber the first time I read The Silmarillion, and it hit me that Morgoth had whole armies of those bastards. It really made you realize how powerful he was.

On the other hand, the Elves from the First Age were much more powerful than the Elves of the Third Age. They would have made Legolas look like a total pussy!

 

[master_shake_05]

No. Captain Jack Sparrow is no where in sight.

The Scouring of the Shire was left out of the movie for a lot of reasons, so no that scene isn't in. For the record, it wasn't Pirates. It was a band of ruffians, led by "Sharky" who was actually Saruman, extracting some revenge on the Hobbits.

Ruffians, pirates, they're bad motherfuckers, yes?

That's all that matters, and it sucks that the scene wasn't included

 

[Powdered Toastman]

Poor Glorfindel...

 

[BorkBork]

Ruffians, pirates, they're bad motherfuckers, yes?

That's all that matters, and it sucks that the scene wasn't included

It would have killed the flow of the movie though, plus tacked on another 20 minutes to an already long movie.

 

[master_shake_05]

It would have killed the flow of the movie though, plus tacked on another 20 minutes to an already long movie.

I understand, but not filming it just as a Deleted Scene or something is pretty sad. That's one of the most memorable sequences in the book, imo.

 

[PhoenixDark]

The Balrogs are one of my favorite elements in Middle-Earth. I remember when I was a kid, scouring the History of Middle-Earth appendicies (by Christopher Tolkien) for any mention of the Balrogs. Scary SOBs.

One detail I really wish was in the movie was Legolas totally losing it when they realized a Balrog was upon them. ("Ai! Ai! A Balrog is come!") The elves, in particular the Firstborn and those close to them, know what it means to run into one. It's implied that Legolas gets it when they do a shot of him utterly terrified when Gandolf says it's a Balrog, but I wanted him to freak out a bit for effect.

The look Legolas has on his face when Galdalf mentions the Balrog is just classic lol. :lol

 

[Jado]

The look Legolas has on his face when Galdalf mentions the Balrog is just classic lol. :lol

I love that scene. I think the book also mentions that Legolas loses his composure and aim, and similarly but subtly so in the movie he has the terrified look and you kinda see he's pretty much putting down his bow. Btw Phoenix, weren't you bothered more by all the elves that showed up at Helm's Deep, Legolas' super-elf nonsense or how poorly Treebeard is protrayed?

A fairly significant character missing from TTT is Erkinbrand. The stuff he did was either cut out of the movie or given to Eomer. Erkinbrand fought in Westfold, which in the movie Theoden mentions in passing when he's mad at Gondor's abscence, and he's the one who shows up near the end of the Battle of Helm's Deep with 1000-2000 Rohirrim. Tom Bombadil, some two other elves the four hobbits meet early in FotR, and Elrond's sons don't show up in the movie either. Radagast the Brown is mentioned in the book but isn't mentioned in the book. That big eagle saves Gandalf from atop Saruman's tower because of him.

In Moria, Gandalf tries to put a sealing spell on the door and was "countered-spelled" by the Balrog and that's led to debate whether they can speak or not. I think that PJ gives a small nod to this scene from the book if you look at the part in the movie right after Boromir almost runs over into nonexistant path and Legolas pulls him back. You see Gandalf "inexplicably" stumble down the steps and looking more exhausted than a moment earlier... which is how it happened in the book after his spell exchange with the Balrog.

There's a Scouring-like scene in FotR when Frodo looks into that liquid with Galadriel that shows a possible future. At least Peter Jackson acknowledges it, fully knowing it wouldn't flow well in RotK.

About the Ring's power: the extent of its power depends on who wears it. A Hobbit or Man wears it and all they get is invisibility and extended life. I read somewhere once that even someone like Aragorn, with status and lineage, would get a bit of considerable power from the Ring and moreso characters like Gandalf, Elrond, Galadriel, etc.

I got 50 pages into the Silmarillion and have put it on hiatus for 2-3 years now. Definitely a very tough read.

I love this depiction of Fingolfin v. Morgoth:

This one however seems a bit more "realistic"

 

[Cymbal Head]

The ONE scene from the Silmarillion that I think would make an AMAZING transition to film would be when Turin mistakenly

Spoiler

kills Beleg

. An artful director could create such a beautifully painful moment out of that.

 

[gollumsluvslave]

The ONE scene from the Silmarillion that I think would make an AMAZING transition to film would be when Turin mistakenly kills Beleg. An artful director could create such a beautifully painful moment out of that.

The whole Children of Hurin story would make for one pretty fucked up film; definitely the darkest most tragic story Tolken wrote.

 

[DDayton]

My only complain with the films is the removal of the Scouring of the Shire. That is the critical event in the entire story, and to remove it shows that Peter Jackson either doesn't care about Tolkien's point or is completely unaware of it.

The entire story arc of LOTR deals with humanity struggling against evil, even when it's the hard thing to do. You see case after case of groups/villages/races refusing to battle evil because it's easier to do nothing, then changing their minds later. Evil comes because good men do nothing. Evil comes EVERYWHERE -- you can't hide from it.

At the end of the story, the hobbits get home to the Shire -- and evil has gotten there. The hobbits manage to rally the entire town together, and the town hobbits finally get up the strength to fight AGAINST evil and save their own town.

The hobbits, as cheery as they are made out to be, are also a pretty pathetic race of creatures, up until the final chapter. Aside from the ones that go off with Gandalf and company, the hobbits are shown to be isolationist cowards who care more about eating and relaxing than the greater good of the world. They aren't very sympathetic characters.Evil can spread anywhere, and when evil gets to the Shire, the hobbits let it run right over them rather than fight against it. They don't fight for good until the other hobbits, who've seen evil elsewhere, rally them up to fight against it -- but when they are rallied, they fight to the bitter end. The hobbits redeem themselves from being passive cowards and become true heroes, simply by standing against evil in their own village.

The Scouring of the Shire is the most important aspect of the LOTR books, in my opinion, as it is the entire story in a microcosm. Evil appears in different aspects in different places, but it is always evil. Great evil (Saruman) slides down and is shown to be what it really is -- cheap greed and petty vendetta (Sharky). Evil isn't fought by giant armies of magical power -- it's fought by real people standing up to it.

I enjoyed Peter Jackson's films, and while I understand why he cut the Shire sequence (length and time), I really feel that the story suffers as a whole. The Scouring of the Shire is supposed to bring out the fact that evil does exist; it's not just a foil for an epic story, but a real thing which appears in our own backyards.

 

[ckohler]

I understand, but not filming it just as a Deleted Scene or something is pretty sad. That's one of the most memorable sequences in the book, imo.

They did actually film some of Scouring of the Shire and it appears briefly in the Fellowship of the Ring when Frodo looks into the Mirror of Galadriel.

 

[DDayton]

They did actually film some of Scouring of the Shire and it appears briefly in the Fellowship of the Ring when Frodo looks into the Mirror of Galadriel.

Grrrr.... I remember that scene. WHY CAN'T JACKSON PROPERLY END A FILM?

I mean, King Kong started off well... the first 1/3 of the film was great!

 

[Fuzzy]

I enjoyed Peter Jackson's films, and while I understand why he cut the Shire sequence (length and time), I really feel that the story suffers as a whole.

It wouldn't have been a problem if TTT was longer and included the Shelob sequence like in the book instead of it being in RotK. I remember reading TTT for the first time and quickly grabbing RotK because of the cliffhanger, the ending of the movie was weak.

 

[Ponn]

Grrrr.... I remember that scene. WHY CAN'T JACKSON PROPERLY END A FILM?

I mean, King Kong started off well... the first 1/3 of the film was great!

Are you kidding? If he would have added that to the film the people bitching about the whole "multiple endings" would have been ten times worse. And I feel the whole meaning of the scene would be entirely lost on most people anyways, it would have catered only to the book readers. I think he should have shot the ending though and maybe added it to the extended edition. I would have loved that and the backlash probably would have been lessened.

 

[DDayton]

Are you kidding? If he would have added that to the film the people bitching about the whole "multiple endings" would have been ten times worse. And I feel the whole meaning of the scene would be entirely lost on most people anyways, it would have catered only to the book readers. I think he should have shot the ending though and maybe added it to the extended edition. I would have loved that and the backlash probably would have been lessened.

Eh -- again, I understand why he didn't shoot it, but ending the film without the -real- ending robbed the story of its point. The LOTR books aren't about the massive battle between man and Sauron -- they are about the hobbits and the role of the individual.

I know -- I can't win 'em all.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

You actually think that the Scouring of the Shire was the pivitol moment of the books? Most people feel that that chapter feels completely tacked on, and written after the fact. True, it does show the Hobbits loss of innocence, and explains why they became more part of the whole world following the Third Age, but it is hardly the pivitol moment of the book.

Many critics see it as Tolkiens allegory for fascism in Europe and there is a lot of belief that it was written well after the rest of the book, which is why it feels a little disjointed on some levels, although I do admit that it is satisfying to see Frodo, Sam, Pippen, and Merry return home to help clean house and receive some of the recognition amongst their own people that they deserve.

As far as the movie goes, a lot of people felt that ROTK was overly long as it was, and had too many endings. Note: I'm not one of them, however, I think King was right to leave the Scouring out. It would have added another chunk of time to the movie, and really wasn't necessary at all to the plot.

 

[mrkgoo]

It wouldn't have been a problem if TTT was longer and included the Shelob sequence like in the book instead of it being in RotK. I remember reading TTT for the first time and quickly grabbing RotK because of the cliffhanger, the ending of the movie was weak.

The shelob ending in TTT, as fantastic as it was for the book, wouldn't work in the film - it takes place at the same time as it does in the film, (on the eve of the battle of Minas Tirith - Gandalf and pippin in the white city), and to have TTT end with that is odd. Remember, in teh book, they split the volume into two books, the first book (or half of TTT) is Merry and pippin, and the second half is sam and frodo. When it came to return of the king, the format was repeated again (if I remember correctly) - it started with merry/pippin, right up until the eagles come, and then skips back to shelob.

this kind of thing, while making for riveting reading, doesn;t work for the film.

 

[genjiZERO]

Sorry if I'm repeating what someone already said, but Balrogs are Maiar (as is Gandolf) that chose Melkor's side against the Valar.

edit:
I guess now that I thnk about it, it makes Sauron a Balrog as well, since he's Maiar.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

Sorry if I'm repeating what someone already said, but Balrogs are Maiar (as is Gandolf) that chose Melkor's side against the Valar.

They chose...poorly!

 

[Solo]

The Scouring wasnt filmed because although it works in novel form, as a film, it would have been completely and utterly anti-climactic. Here you have this massive battle ending, everyone saying their tearful goodbyes, and Frodo riding (sailing) off into the sunset. To throw in a minor skirmish before the Gray Havens wouldnt fit in the film coherently.

 

[genjiZERO]

They chose...poorly!

true, but Melkor was by far the most powerful of the Valar.

 

[DDayton]

The Scouring wasnt filmed because although it works in novel form, as a film, it would have been completely and utterly anti-climactic. Here you have this massive battle ending, everyone saying their tearful goodbyes, and Frodo riding (sailing) off into the sunset. To throw in a minor skirmish before the Gray Havens wouldnt fit in the film coherently.

Mutter mutter mutter...

I hate to admit it, but you have a point. It still doesn't change the fact that it is vitally important to the book and (in my opinion) is the key event which is led up to by everything else in LOTR.

(It was my favorite scene! It was the best part of the books! ARRRRRGH!)

 

[mrkgoo]

You actually think that the Scouring of the Shire was the pivitol moment of the books? Most people feel that that chapter feels completely tacked on, and written after the fact. True, it does show the Hobbits loss of innocence, and explains why they became more part of the whole world following the Third Age, but it is hardly the pivitol moment of the book.

Many critics see it as Tolkiens allegory for fascism in Europe and there is a lot of belief that it was written well after the rest of the book, which is why it feels a little disjointed on some levels, although I do admit that it is satisfying to see Frodo, Sam, Pippen, and Merry return home to help clean house and receive some of the recognition amongst their own people that they deserve.

As far as the movie goes, a lot of people felt that ROTK was overly long as it was, and had too many endings. Note: I'm not one of them, however, I think King was right to leave the Scouring out. It would have added another chunk of time to the movie, and really wasn't necessary at all to the plot.

I agree - I think the scouring was a great commentary (unintentional or not), but feels a little tacked on. I find it really neat to have Frodo and co return, only to have the other hobbits completely oblivious to the fact they just saved the world - and charming that the four actually retain their humility. Great stuff. Of course, the evil still reaches, because Frodo is unable to enjoy what he has saved, because of his wounds against the WitchKing...

What I do think is bad to miss out is closure with Saruman - which is great in teh extended edition -kept the essence of Wormtongues betrayal, but concise.

 

[Solo]

As I said, I agree that it does work well and is important in the book. It shows the growth, maturity and resolve the hobbits have acquired during the past year. It also to me represents the loss of innocence. But, at the same time, as I also said, I feel Jackson made the right call in not filming it.

 

[MagicJackBauer]

I love this depiction of Fingolfin v. Morgoth:

OMG. that pic is so bad ass

 

[Peru]

Just want to pop in and say that those who like the scouring and think it should be in the film should be killed. It was a horrible segment in the book, not essential at all, just tagged on for improved length. It gave nothing new in form of moral, story, metaphor, character build. It was boring.. wow, another battle. As if there weren't enough. And as if the movie didn't have enough of those, in fact it should've cut out 50% of the battle material already there, but then we're getting onto different subject.

 

[DDayton]

Just want to pop in and say that those who like the scouring and think it should be in the film should be killed. It was a horrible segment in the book, not essential at all, just tagged on for improved length. It gave nothing new in form of moral, story, metaphor, character build. It was boring.. wow, another battle. As if there weren't enough. And as if the movie didn't have enough of those, in fact it should've cut out 50% of the battle material already there, but then we're getting onto different subject.

I strongly disagree -- it was different than other parts of the book, but it completed the circle. It took the hobbits, who were portrayed in a generally negative light (lazy, isolationist, wimpy folks) and made them heroes. The story started in the shire and it ends in the shire -- it's the entire battle in a microcosm.

I have a feeling there will be no end to this. Heh.

 

[PhoenixDark]

The Scouring was an interesting part of the book, and it did drive certain important points home as DavidDayton says. Despite that, it does feel tacked on, and almost like a different book in many ways.

I fully agree with Jackson's decision to leave it out of ROTK. When you consider how movies are made, his decision makes even more sense. The climax of the movie is the the Battle of the Pelennor Fields. It would have been a terrible decision on the director's part to add on another huge climax right after that one.

 

[Naked Snake]

The Scouring of the Shire was one of my favorite parts of the books, and I was really bummed that it didn't make it to film.

 

[xabre]

This a painting or an illustration? Fuck it's awesome though.

 

[Peru]

I strongly disagree -- it was different than other parts of the book, but it completed the circle. It took the hobbits, who were portrayed in a generally negative light (lazy, isolationist, wimpy folks) and made them heroes. The story started in the shire and it ends in the shire -- it's the entire battle in a microcosm.

I have a feeling there will be no end to this. Heh.

No. They're made heroes when they

a)launch a series of successful attacks such as getting treebeard and pals to storm saruman
b) save the world by getting rid of the ring


I think that's plenty without participating in a boring local pubhouse slug with a cranky old man and his thugs.

 

[Powdered Toastman]

http://www.mi.uib.no/~respl/tolkien/Tolkien/

for other nice LotR theme illustrations

 

[SpoonyBard]

http://www.mi.uib.no/~respl/tolkien/Tolkien/

for other nice LotR theme illustrations

It's pretty interesting to see how some of those were directly copied to the movies.

 

[Solo]

Well, they did have the two most famous Tolkien artists working on the movie in the art department...

 

[Falch]

The Encyclopedia of Arda

Tons of info. Awesome site.

 

[SpoonyBard]

Well, they did have the two most famous Tolkien artists working on the movie in the art department...

Yeah, I know, it was just interesting how well they managed to copy those scenes to film.

 

[Prospero]

Yeah, the Alan Lee edition of The Lord of the Rings (that came out in the early '90s) now looks like a movie tie-in, since so many of the illustrations for it were duplicated in the movies--not just their content, but their image compositions as well.

 

[robertsan21]

I am a big fan of lord of the ring book and the films!

I would have wanted EVERYTHING that was in the book to be on film just to see how it looks as I find Film much better and more fun than reading books.

So if a film would have been 10 hours long I wouldnt mind it at all the longer the film the better it is IMO.
I hate 2 hours movies I want them to never end if its a good film


now I have a question

Multiple endings?
are you guys talking about the end of ROTK where the camera fades out and then shows them laying on the rocks and then fades out again and so on?

people think that is a multiple ending?

nothing strange at all with that IMO cant understand how people can take it as a multiple ending....

 

[DDayton]

No. They're made heroes when they
a)launch a series of successful attacks such as getting treebeard and pals to storm saruman
b) save the world by getting rid of the ring
.

I was referring to the other hobbits, actually. Not the questing ones -- the other ones, who (as a rule) tried to avoid things like the outside world.

I probably should have phrased it better.

 

[Memles]

I was unaware this had derived so nicely into a Scouring battle, I would have arrived sooner.

I just got finished a semester in a course about Tolkien, and I finished the term by writing an essay on how, at their core, Tolkien's story is one of hobbits. It starts with hobbits, it ends with hobbits, and much of the story's fate revolves around hobbits. Tolkien begins the book with hobbits in the Shire, peaceful, and then through the hobbits the reader enters into a world where everything is foreign and everything is a new experience. Without the Scouring of the Shire, however, the hobbits do not really get to complete their story as a people within the books. While the four individual hobbits no doubt showed extremely heroic properties within the context of their journey, the hobbits as a people were unable to truly show their ability to rise above.

It's a little tacky that Gandalf just kind of leaves them to fight it out themselves despite clearly knowing the evil that lies ahead, but that's really what the scene represents. It represents the hobbits saving their own people, rallying them together and finding their own place in Middle-earth.

However, the problem was that in the case of the films, I really don't think the scene was possible. I think it's less about length, and more about the logistical nightmare that is the deneoument. Jackson was creating cinema, not a novel, and I think that their structures are fundamentally different. I think that the Scouring would have made an extremely interesting scene, and would have closed out things nicely...but I do not believe that most movie viewers would look at it that way at all. It would rather be yet another ending, and one that seems to drag at that.

But it's in place in the books...as a hobbit story, it ends with the hobbits.

 

[DDayton]

I was unaware this had derived so nicely into a Scouring battle, I would have arrived sooner.

I just got finished a semester in a course about Tolkien, and I finished the term by writing an essay on how, at their core, Tolkien's story is one of hobbits. It starts with hobbits, it ends with hobbits, and much of the story's fate revolves around hobbits. Tolkien begins the book with hobbits in the Shire, peaceful, and then through the hobbits the reader enters into a world where everything is foreign and everything is a new experience. Without the Scouring of the Shire, however, the hobbits do not really get to complete their story as a people within the books. While the four individual hobbits no doubt showed extremely heroic properties within the context of their journey, the hobbits as a people were unable to truly show their ability to rise above.

It's a little tacky that Gandalf just kind of leaves them to fight it out themselves despite clearly knowing the evil that lies ahead, but that's really what the scene represents. It represents the hobbits saving their own people, rallying them together and finding their own place in Middle-earth.

However, the problem was that in the case of the films, I really don't think the scene was possible. I think it's less about length, and more about the logistical nightmare that is the deneoument. Jackson was creating cinema, not a novel, and I think that their structures are fundamentally different. I think that the Scouring would have made an extremely interesting scene, and would have closed out things nicely...but I do not believe that most movie viewers would look at it that way at all. It would rather be yet another ending, and one that seems to drag at that.

But it's in place in the books...as a hobbit story, it ends with the hobbits.

I owe you a cookie.

 

[Almighty_Chocobo]

http://mirror1.howitshouldhaveended.com/HISHE_LOTR_small.wmv