Does RotK Feel Rushed?

[Theron Bugtussle]

I have seen reference to a general feeling by several in B-D Movies forum that <I>The Return of the King</I> was rushed. As though too many things were crammed into it, or perhaps things were not given the extra detailed treatment you might have expected due to the time factor (movie length). <P>I felt this to some degree. I anticipated feeling so, when I saw how much was taken out of TTT (compared to the book) and left either for RotK, or for the cutting room floor--if ever even filmed.<P>My first example: The Voice of Saruman, in my opinion, should have been included in either TTT or RotK, and the Wizards' Duel should have been removed, and kept in context with the book. I crudely label this directorial decision, along with Gandalf's casting out of Saruman from Theoden, as the "Dungeoning and Dragoning" of LotR by Peter Jackson.<P>My thinking here ( * dripping with sarcasm * ) is, otherwise Gandalf might not have thought "twice about returning through the door, after escaping from the roof" of Orthanc. Fortunately, PJ gave us the Wizards' Duel so the dumb audience could easily see which side Saruman was on. <I>"I am no longer Gandalf the Grey, you may call me Gandalf the Bozo, now."</I><P>In another example, how far is it from the Vale of Morthond (exit of the Paths of the Dead) to Pelargir? In the movie, it must have been a few furlongs at most. Aragorn and the Army of Oathbreakers just appeared at Minas Tirith--as from nowhere. <P>And in <I>unbookly</I> manner (I am purposely attempting to coin the phrase "unbookly" in the sense of ungodly, when comparing corruptions of Jackson's movie versus Tolkien's book--my apologies if I am not original) the travelers along the Paths of the Dead shed their horses on the way in. Did they have tickets for the 5 o'clock train? <P>This rush was required because of all the things pushed into the movie from TTT, or from directorial decisions to emphasize only particular aspects of the story at the expense of others.