Quote:
Originally Posted by otherstar
Except that Jackson changed many plot points, especially in The Two Towers.
For example:
--Eomer was never exiled from Edoras. He was imprisoned and released after Gandalf released Theoden from Saruman's spell.
--Eowyn, the women, and children, never went to Helm's Deep. They went to Dunharrow and stayed there. The folks in the Glittering Caves were the resident's of Helm's Deep, which was Erkenbrand's fortress.
--It was Erkenbrand and his 1000 foot soldiers, not Eomer that saved the day at Helm's Deep
--Helm's Dike was left out altogether
--The warg atttack and the non-sense with Aragorn falling off of a cliff NEVER happened in the book
--There were no elves other than Legolas at Helm's Deep.
--There were around 2000 men (or more) defending Helm's Deep, not 300 as shown in the movie.
These are just the big changes. Yes, it caught the spirit of the story, but that is not what I'd call a "good adaptation." I can understand leaving things out like Bombadil and the Barrow Wights, and the Scouring of the Shire...but Jackson manufactured some parts of the movie out of whole cloth (like the Dead going to Minas Tirith--Aragorn dismissed them after the Battle for Pelargir).
|
Even bigger plot points and points of irritation:
1. Aragorn was NEVER in doubt as to his heritage or claiming the throne. The mincing ranger reluctant to claim his birthright, and hiding from his heritage, as portrayed by Jackson DID NOT EXIST.
2. In the extended edition, the Witch King breaks Gandalf's staff and throws him off his horse. THAT'S ****ING BULLSHIT. The witch king did NOT do that in the books, and was NOT more powerful than Gandalf in that manner. In fact, Gandalf holds off AT LEAST four -- but more probably all nine -- at Weathertop by himself. And that was Gandalf the Grey, not Gandalf the White.
3. Frodo NEVER doubts Sam's loyalty, and does not "pick" Gollum over Sam at any point in time. Sam does want to ditch Gollum, and Frodo refuses, but that's quite a difference from what happens in the movie.
4. Frodo and Sam are more of a master and utterly loyal servant in the books. Frodo is older by quite a bit -- 50 to 30, which is barely past legal age in Hobbit years, and they are not "pals" in the way that they are in the movies, but their friendship certainly grows as they go through their trials.
5. Faramir never agrees to take Frodo and the ring to Minas Tirith in the books. Rather, he immediately lets them go, knowing the risk and consequences.
6. Minor point - Wizards don't have telekenesis, as shown in the battle between Gandalf and Saruman. I don't even much care about that, EXCEPT that it makes the "Aragorn and Frodo on the wobbling stone thing" in Moria even stupider than it already is.
7. The ents did NOT decide AGAINST fighting Saruman, and then suddenly change their mind. They do that for dramatic tension, I guess, but it's stupid in the context of the ents. They do NOT suddenly do anything, including change their minds. It sort of betrays their nature to suggest otherwise.
For the most part, I think Jackson did a great job. I do dislike some of the revisions that they made to -- I guess -- increase the dramatic tension. I think many of these revisions go against how Tolkien -- who saw things in very black/white terms -- envisioned these characters.
I dislike the -- CHANGED OUR MIND!! -- approach especially. Aragorn as to claiming his birthright. The ents as to attacking Saruman. Faramir as to releasing Frodo. It weakens the characters. Makes them stupider and/or more reluctant heroes, or even afraid to do what must be done when they know it is right. No thanks.