Jackson's LoTR Movies from the Perspective of JRRT

[Mithadan]

I rarely post in this forum. But I recently spent several hours, as a result of a minor COVID exile, re-watching all three. On these forums, when the movies came out there was discussion after discussion about what members liked and did not like, what actors we liked and did not like, and changes or omissions from the books.

While watching the movies again, a slightly different question occurred to me. Tolkien, perhaps reluctantly, sold the movies rights to LoTR and the Hobbit during his lifetime. However, he avoided conveying to rights to companies that he believed would eviscerate his vision of Middle Earth. So my question is, what specifically would JRRT have liked or particularly disliked about the movies?

This question is limited to the LoTR movies. I suspect that tomes could be written about the Hobbit movies and RoP.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Well, judging by Letter 210, his excoriation of the Zimmerman film treat ment, he would have hated Jackson's handling of Weathertop.

"The Black Riders do not scream, but keep a more terrifying silence. There is no fight, ... Why has my account been entirely rewritten here, with disregard for the rest of the tale? I can see that there are certain difficulties in representing a dark scene; but they are not insuperable. A scene of gloom lit by a small red fire, with the Wraiths slowly approaching as darker shadows – until the moment when Frodo puts on the Ring, and the King steps forward revealed – would seem to me far more impressive than yet one more scene of screams and rather meaningless slashings.....

I have spent some time on this passage, as an example of what I find too frequent to give me 'pleasure or satisfaction': deliberate alteration of the story, in fact and significance"

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Mithadan

I rarely post in this forum. But I recently spent several hours, as a result of a minor COVID exile, re-watching all three. On these forums, when the movies came out there was discussion after discussion about what members liked and did not like, what actors we liked and did not like, and changes or omissions from the books.

While watching the movies again, a slightly different question occurred to me. Tolkien, perhaps reluctantly, sold the movies rights to LoTR and the Hobbit during his lifetime. However, he avoided conveying to rights to companies that he believed would eviscerate his vision of Middle Earth. So my question is, what specifically would JRRT have liked or particularly disliked about the movies?

This question is limited to the LoTR movies. I suspect that tomes could be written about the Hobbit movies and RoP.

I would say Tolkien would be utterly appalled by:

1) Arwen facing the Nazgul at the Ford of Bruinen instead of Glorfindel. It is quite clear that an Eldar like Glorfindel, who had been to Valinor (not to mention being reincarnated), would be the only Elf with standing to drive the Nazgul into the Ford. It is well established that the WitchKing had already fled the countenance of Glorfindel in his wrath. Arwen simply did not possess that power. Or as Gandalf related:

"In Rivendell there live still some of his chief foes: the Elven-wise, lords of the Eldar from beyond the furthest seas. They do not fear the Ringwraiths, for those who have dwelt in the Blessed Realm live at once in both worlds, and against both the Seen and the Unseen they have great power."

2) The debasement of Faramir. Faramir dragging the Hobbits off to Osgiliath would have made Tolkien's head explode. It was a plot point that, to say the least, was embarrassing. The ignoblement of Denethor would probably be up there in making Tolkien throw up in his mouth a little.

3) The Elves magically appearing at Helm's Deep. But I guess that enormity would have been more palatable than Arwen arriving, ready for battle, in her guise as Xenarwen warrior princess.

4) Frodo dumping Sam. A cornerstone of the books is the faith, fealty and friendship of Frodo and Sam.

5) "Arwen is dying." A fundamentally absurd misconception by Jackson.

6) The WitchKing destroying Gandalf's staff. So much for Tolkien having Eru himself ressurrecting a Maia in order to complete his mission. The breaking of a wizard's staff is seen as a dimiunition of power, an emasculation, as when Gandalf destroys Saruman's. Sometimes I wonder if Jackson actually comprehended Tolkien's writing at all.

I could go on, but I will merely irritate myself to no end. I think Tolkien would be vehemently opposed to the many canonic omissions allegedly cut due to time compression that were inexplicaby replaced by random fan-fic nonsense. An irate Tolkien would have bit through the stem of his pipe.

What would Tolkien like?

1) Bilbo's birthday party.

2) Moria. I would think Tolkien couldn't find much fault in the depiction. Even when Frodo gets skewered by a Troll rather than an Orc.

3) Frodo's departure on the last ship to Valinor. It was done well and fairly faithful to the book.

4) The omission of Tom Bombadil. I think Tolkien himself sort of admitted that Bombadil was an added storyline that meant something to him, but did not necessarily seem germane to the overall plot. As I mentioned previously, it's not the omission of a plot point, it's the glomming on of superfluous addenda that would have infuriated him.

[Alassë Estel]

Morthoron's post more-or-less covers it for me too.

[Bêthberry]

Tolkien has become a monster, devoured by his own popularity and absorbed into the absurdity of our time," he complained. "The chasm between the beauty and seriousness of the work, and what it has become, has overwhelmed me. The commercialization has reduced the aesthetic and philosophical impact of the creation to nothing. There is only one solution for me: to turn my head away... They eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people aged 15 to 25."

Oh, wait, you wanted JRRT's likely opinion. This was Christopher's (as quoted in a 2022 Screen Rant article).

I would add to Morth's rant the depiction of Aragorn, full of modernish angst and not in the tradition of heroism which Tolkien depicted.

I disagree with Morth's idea that Tolkien would not mind the omission of Bombadil; I think that's a guess rather than a given. While we often focus on Tom's nonsense as something immaterial to the plot, I think we overlook the important point the Bombadil episode adds: that Tom is immune to the influence of the Ring. It might not be a major point to the story but it helps to increase the mystique and mystery of the Ring itself and makes Frodo succumbing to it that much more tragic and conflicted. It also helps establish the long history of the mythology, the mythic sweep that intrigues many readers. Even Goldberry's washing day helps to establish that mythic time frame, to say nothing of the treacherous Old Man Willow in the frightening forest; in fairy tales and old lore, forests are scary places and weather is not a natural or metrological phenomenon (see Caradhras for personification of the natural environment), and so there are intimations of the later threats with Ents and Huorns. Jackson, in my memory of the movies (which I haven't watched in years), mostly overlooks this tantalizing aspect of the narrative, that there is more, far more, than this one vanquishing of evil and that the world is not something which humans control.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Christopher disliked the prologue. In his view, the Wide World should be gradually revealed to the reader as it is to Frodo.

For myself, I wouldn't have minded the Last Alliance flashback stuff being placed in Frodo and Gandalf's "Shadow of the Past" conversation. Of course, that would imply rather more leisure than Jackson's ultrcompressed timeframe allowed- Frodo leaving that very night, not months later.

[Snowdog]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

I would say Tolkien would be utterly appalled by:

1) Arwen facing the Nazgul at the Ford of Bruinen instead of Glorfindel. It is quite clear that an Eldar like Glorfindel, who had been to Valinor (not to mention being reincarnated), would be the only Elf with standing to drive the Nazgul into the Ford. It is well established that the WitchKing had already fled the countenance of Glorfindel in his wrath. Arwen simply did not possess that power. Or as Gandalf related:

"In Rivendell there live still some of his chief foes: the Elven-wise, lords of the Eldar from beyond the furthest seas. They do not fear the Ringwraiths, for those who have dwelt in the Blessed Realm live at once in both worlds, and against both the Seen and the Unseen they have great power."

2) The debasement of Faramir. Faramir dragging the Hobbits off to Osgiliath would have made Tolkien's head explode. It was a plot point that, to say the least, was embarrassing. The ignoblement of Denethor would probably be up there in making Tolkien throw up in his mouth a little.

3) The Elves magically appearing at Helm's Deep. But I guess that enormity would have been more palatable than Arwen arriving, ready for battle, in her guise as Xenarwen warrior princess.

4) Frodo dumping Sam. A cornerstone of the books is the faith, fealty and friendship of Frodo and Sam.

5) "Arwen is dying." A fundamentally absurd misconception by Jackson.

6) The WitchKing destroying Gandalf's staff. So much for Tolkien having Eru himself ressurrecting a Maia in order to complete his mission. The breaking of a wizard's staff is seen as a dimiunition of power, an emasculation, as when Gandalf destroys Saruman's. Sometimes I wonder if Jackson actually comprehended Tolkien's writing at all.

I could go on, but I will merely irritate myself to no end. I think Tolkien would be vehemently opposed to the many canonic omissions allegedly cut due to time compression that were inexplicaby replaced by random fan-fic nonsense. An irate Tolkien would have bit through the stem of his pipe.

What would Tolkien like?

1) Bilbo's birthday party.

2) Moria. I would think Tolkien couldn't find much fault in the depiction. Even when Frodo gets skewered by a Troll rather than an Orc.

3) Frodo's departure on the last ship to Valinor. It was done well and fairly faithful to the book.

4) The omission of Tom Bombadil. I think Tolkien himself sort of admitted that Bombadil was an added storyline that meant something to him, but did not necessarily seem germane to the overall plot. As I mentioned previously, it's not the omission of a plot point, it's the glomming on of superfluous addenda that would have infuriated him.

↑ ↑ ↑
This.

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Oh, wait, you wanted JRRT's likely opinion. This was Christopher's (as quoted in a 2022 Screen Rant article).

I would add to Morth's rant the depiction of Aragorn, full of modernish angst and not in the tradition of heroism which Tolkien depicted.

Agree with all this too.

Tolkien would be aghast at what PJ did to Aragorn's story, which was a complete gutting of the core of Lord of the Rings. The two kingdoms of Gondor and Arnor and Aragorn's bloodline is the essential core to the story, yet PJ just wipes the storyboard clear of all that and does what ... Aragorn just runs off north from his kingship of Gondor and leaves it to the (eviscerated character) Denethor because he has the same weak blood that ran through Isildur's veins? No.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

I disagree with Morth's idea that Tolkien would not mind the omission of Bombadil; I think that's a guess rather than a given. While we often focus on Tom's nonsense as something immaterial to the plot, I think we overlook the important point the Bombadil episode adds: that Tom is immune to the influence of the Ring. It might not be a major point to the story but it helps to increase the mystique and mystery of the Ring itself and makes Frodo succumbing to it that much more tragic and conflicted. It also helps establish the long history of the mythology, the mythic sweep that intrigues many readers. Even Goldberry's washing day helps to establish that mythic time frame, to say nothing of the treacherous Old Man Willow in the frightening forest; in fairy tales and old lore, forests are scary places and weather is not a natural or metrological phenomenon (see Caradhras for personification of the natural environment), and so there are intimations of the later threats with Ents and Huorns. Jackson, in my memory of the movies (which I haven't watched in years), mostly overlooks this tantalizing aspect of the narrative, that there is more, far more, than this one vanquishing of evil and that the world is not something which humans control.

Well, in my defense, I did offer caveats to the conjecture overall. Tolkien did, on several occasions, remark that Bombadil was an "insertion" into L.R. --

J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter #237, 12 April 1962:
At any rate it performs the service of further 'integrating' Tom with the world of the L.R. into which he was inserted.

Not to belabor the point further with addenda and ponderous quotations, I believe Tolkien would understand the concept of movie time compression, given that the film trilogy was over 9 hours as it was, and tacitly forgiven the Bombadil omission for concision in storytelling; however, as I stated previously, he would not, in any way, shape or form, have forgiven Jackson with deleting aspects wholesale of the original story and replacing them with fan-fictional nonsense (like nearly 1/3 of The Two Towers film, for instance).

You simply cannot omit Tom Bombadil yet insert a mind-bogglingly idiotic sequence of an orc attack during the flight from Meduseld to Helm's Deep and have Aragorn being dragged off a cliff by a warg only to be wakened afterwards by the amorous kiss of his horse, or Faramir spending a ridiculous amount of time dragging the Hobbits back to Osgiliath only to suddenly remember he wasn't a complete douche bag and release Frodo and Sam after all.

P.S. On further consideration, I think Jackson also did a disservice to the Hobbits by having Saruman killed at Orthanc. One of the complaints of the films by critics was the numerous "endings" of the story. In part, the conclusion of the film was taken completely out of context, and the true intent of the Hobbits returning home was totally obliterated when they were not allowed to prove that they had "grown up" (after all, L.R. was a coming of age tale at its heart). The "Scouring of the Shire" being eliminated removed an important plot point of the books, showing the Fellowship Hobbits had become formidable and could right wrongs without wizards, elves, dwarves and royal men.

[Morthoron]

Oh, and I forgot about the green scrubbing bubbles that cleansed Minas Tirith with a caustic concoction of oathbreaking corpses. Do you think Tolkien would have appreciated the spring cleaning?