What happened to Eomer????

[Elfchick7]

Ok, so it has been a while since I have been on regularly so I don't know if some already posted a similar thread.

That said, one thing that REALLY bugged me is how nonexistent Eomer's character was in the movie. What's up with that???? Any comments?

[jezebelus]

How do you mean "nonexistent". I mean I didn't read the book so are you wanna say he wasn't mentioned in it?

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Elfchick7

That said, one thing that REALLY bugged me is how nonexistent Eomer's character was in the movie. What's up with that???? Any comments?

I don't really understand what you mean. Eomer was in the movies, and although his role obviously wasn't as big as it was in the books, he still had a considerable amount of screen time. In my opinion also, Karl Urban did a really good job at playing Eomer.

[Elfchick7]

Well, I loved Eomer's character in the books. I felt like there was a bit more insight into his character. In the movies, however, his part was minimized to the point that if he had been cut out all together it wouldn't have made much of a difference. At least, that is how I felt about it.

[Sir Kohran]

I think it's funny that people say his movie role was dminished from that of the books when he actually gets the vital part of leading the returning Rohirrim to victory at Helm's Deep...which he didn't do in the books. So I'd say Eomer came out with a fine amount of focus.

Well, I loved Eomer's character in the books. I felt like there was a bit more insight into his character. In the movies, however, his part was minimized to the point that if he had been cut out all together it wouldn't have made much of a difference. At least, that is how I felt about it.

Eomer wasn't a big character in the books anyway. If he had been cut out of the books altogether it wouldn't have made much of a difference.

[Elfchick7]

Hmm. I wonder why I remember him being more important in the books. I guess I'll have to reread them.

[The Might]

Well, that happened with about all the characters due to lack of time in the movie. There definitely are characters which lost much more of their "shine" from the books, for example the really non-existent Tom Bombadil that played a key role in helping the Hobbits continue their quest, and eventually also in the defeat of the Witch-king.

[Finduilas]

The movie really downplayed everyone. I actually didn't notice Eomers loss of notice, except that they did not at all have his friendship with either Aragorn or Gimli. That kinda bugged me.

[Snowdog]

The whole Eomer "banishment" in the movie in place of his "jailing" in the books is what didn't make sense. As if one "banished from a kingdom" by the King, no matter his state of mind or under whose influence, would be allowed to ride off with a fair-sized army to.... where? No, it didn't make a whole lot of sense. I understand what elfchick is getting at here.

[Sir Kohran]

Originally Posted by Snowdog

The whole Eomer "banishment" in the movie in place of his "jailing" in the books is what didn't make sense. As if one "banished from a kingdom" by the King, no matter his state of mind or under whose influence, would be allowed to ride off with a fair-sized army to.... where? No, it didn't make a whole lot of sense. I understand what elfchick is getting at here.

He says "My company are those loyal to Rohan, and for that we are banished", so I assume he was just thrown out of Edoras by himself and most of the soldiers followed him willingly. I agree it's a bit odd that he just disappears with them all right until the climax of the movie. However, I've been playing Battle for Middle Earth (based on the movie) where several of the missions have Eomer and his men fighting Saruman's forces in random places in Rohan until they go to Helm's Deep, so I guess he just left to fight elsewhere.

[Lalaith]

As far as I'm concerned Karl Urban's Eomer was one of the best characterisations in the films, and one of the few I have no issues with at all.
I really liked the way he was shown as a serious, driven young man, of few words. I thought of his sister as just like him, and wish Miranda Otto had been directed in such a way.

[The Might]

In the books Eomer does not have 2000 men like Aragorn says in the movie, but only his eored of 120 men.

"In times of war or unquiet each Marshal of the Mark had under his immediate orders, as part of his "household" (that is, quartered under arms at his residence) an eored ready for battle which he could use in an emergency at his own discretion. This was what Eomer had in fact done; but the charge against him, urged by Grima, was that the King had in this case forbidden him to take any of the still uncommitted forces of the East-mark from Edoras, which was insufficiently defended; that he knew of the disaster of the Fords of Isen and the death of Theodred before he pursued the Orcs into the remote Wold; and that he had also against general orders allowed strangers to go free, and had even lent them horses" (UT).

I also thought that the size of the army Eomer left with was a bit exagerated, and that he wouldn't have been allowed to do such a thing.

[Elfchick7]

Originally Posted by Lalaith

As far as I'm concerned Karl Urban's Eomer was one of the best characterisations in the films, and one of the few I have no issues with at all.

I fully agree with you, Lalaith. I have no problem with Karl Urban portrayal of Eomer. It is, rather, I wish there had more screen time for him. Eomer is such a great character.

As for the size of Eomer's "army", I concur. It was a bit unbelievable. Saruman and Wormtongue are not so foolish as to banish them as an army. You would think that would find more clever ways of dealing with the problem. Uruk-Hai assassins, for example...

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I remember the words, from many a year ago, of one Barrowdowner (might have been Bethberry) about how Tolkien seemed to have lost interest in Gimli & Legolas as his book progressed; and that he seemed to prefer the newer characters—Éomer & Faramir. Peter Jackson, understandably, preferred to keep Gimli & Legolas as Aragorn's main sidekicks for all three films.

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Sir Kohran

Eomer wasn't a big character in the books anyway. If he had been cut out of the books altogether it wouldn't have made much of a difference.

I disagree. If not for Eomer, who would have made the last stand on the Pelennor in such a way as he did? Eomer's character was vital to that amazing part in the books. Eomer also let the Three Hunters go freely in his land- if not for the disposition of Eomer, the Three might not have been to pass. Also, his friendship with Aragorn is a nice touch. I don't know about you, but I would surely miss him if he wasn't a part of the story.

I think that, as many have said, it's hard to give a character the time he or she deserves on film as they are given in the books. Many, if not all, of the characters had some sort of push back. It's just impossible to give each character the time they properly deserve on the big screen...

[Elfchick7]

Originally Posted by MatthewM

I think that, as many have said, it's hard to give a character the time he or she deserves on film as they are given in the books. Many, if not all, of the characters had some sort of push back. It's just impossible to give each character the time they properly deserve on the big screen...

Point taken. It's sad though. Many of my non-books Tolkien friends don't even remember Eomer in the movies. *sniff*

[Sir Kohran]

I disagree. If not for Eomer, who would have made the last stand on the Pelennor in such a way as he did? Eomer's character was vital to that amazing part in the books. Eomer also let the Three Hunters go freely in his land- if not for the disposition of Eomer, the Three might not have been to pass. Also, his friendship with Aragorn is a nice touch.

Okay, what I meant was that he isn't that important. Yes, Eomer does get some important parts but he's certainly not as important as characters like Gandalf, Frodo, Aragorn, Sam, etc. His part in the books is an important one, but it is not pivotal or even central to the story, which is why his character in the movies is neither pivotal or central, though I still think he got plenty of focus and a fair share of screen time.

I don't know about you, but I would surely miss him if he wasn't a part of the story.

Eomer is actually one of my favourite characters - in the middle of all the rambling about how weak and fallen men are, he is an icon of bravery, strength and loyalty that is refreshing to read about. And I would miss him if he wasn't there. But at the same time, he's not vital - he's more a character that I like to see. If you took him out of the story, it would be less effective, but it would still work.

[MatthewM]

Ok, I misunderstood your post then.

[The Sixth Wizard]

Originally Posted by Sir Kohran

However, I've been playing Battle for Middle Earth (based on the movie) where several of the missions have Eomer and his men fighting Saruman's forces in random places in Rohan until they go to Helm's Deep, so I guess he just left to fight elsewhere.

That's a good game!

I don't think Eomer was nerfed as much as some of the other characters. Gimli is a tool, Legolas a chick magnet. Aragorn can't control his brutality (see Mouth of Sauron deleted scene) and Faramir can't resist the power of the ring by what I remember. Frodo's too young, Pippin and Meriadoc were comic relief, Sam was 'sent home' by Gollum, Saruman has no power of the voice, Theoden looked wizened and altogether much too 'poisoned' ... I can go on for years here people!

Anyway, Eomer didn't have it too bad in perspective, though he probably should have been portrayed better in the Battle of the Pellenor fields. Let's just be thankful he's not too badly done by.

P.S. I actually quite like the films, don't get the wrong impression.

[Elfchick7]

Ugh, don't even get me started on Legolas!!! What a disappointment! I could rant and criticize for years....but that is for another thread. Or is it?

[Folwren]

Be happy that they only downplayed his character and didn't destroy it altogether. *coughfrodocough*...*and others*...

I see what you mean, though. I would say they did it with others, too. Gandalf, for one, is one character who got very little character development, even though he got a considerable amount of screen time.

But they didn't destroy his character, even if they down played it a little bit.

-- Folwren

[Lalwendë]

I think you see a little more of Eomer in the Extended version to be fair. And his portrayal was very good too, so I think he wouldn't be 'forgotten' by all who saw the films! Interestingly, I was watching an episode of Xena:Warrior Princess the other night and Karl Urban was playing a deliciously evil (and non-cheesy, an achievement by Xena standards!) Caesar - made me see he is a pretty good actor!

[Mattius]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

I think you see a little more of Eomer in the Extended version to be fair. And his portrayal was very good too, so I think he wouldn't be 'forgotten' by all who saw the films! Interestingly, I was watching an episode of Xena:Warrior Princess the other night and Karl Urban was playing a deliciously evil (and non-cheesy, an achievement by Xena standards!) Caesar - made me see he is a pretty good actor!

Yes but then he was in Doom

[TheGreatElvenWarrior]

I don't think he was cut out that much, but even the people that hadn't read the books like me at the time, knew that he was there and had a crucial part to play. I have read the books now of coarse. I also think that Karl Urban plays Eomer wonderfully.