Lord of the Rings Movies vs Books. A difference in two tales.

[Stone Cold]

Any work of the scale of Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings movie screenplay was going to exhibit differences from the source material. While the three movies had a large number of minor and trivial differences from the book, there were quite a few substantial differences as well. These major differences are as follows—1. differences in form; this includes changes made to the story by deleting or adding parts or spreading ideas over a long period of time, and 2. differences in substance, which included changing actual ideas and people in the story to suit the film. Some such changes include the changing of almost all the characters and changing events to reach the same outcome as the book.

The director and writers of the motion pictures faced some significant challenges in bringing J.R.R. Tolkien's work to the big screen. Not the least of these was the enormous scale of the story. The The Lord of the Rings is a very lengthy story that was, itself, derived from a fictional universe of prodigious dimensions. In it, an entirely original world of the author's manufacture forms the backdrop of a story with multiple intelligent races (Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, Ents and Men), their many languages and dialects, a highly developed historical narrative, and a minutely detailed geography of the world that had, itself, changed significantly over time. The result of all this is a level of complexity that is very difficult to apprehend in a screenplay. How does one go about presenting, for example, the historical background of a story that spans an enormous period of history that is outside the scope of the movie to be filmed? The difficulties the writers faced were innumerable, and many compromises to the story were required to successfully adapt it to the medium of film.

Justifications of changes

Soon after the release of the first movie, controversy began to arise over deviations in the screenplay from Tolkien's own story. Key characters such as Glorfindel and Tom Bombadil were absent, and substantial parts of the story were completely missing. Moreover, characters that were present, such as Elrond, Aragorn, and Gandalf, were substantially altered. The release of The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers took this even further with deviations in character development and major plot elements becoming more significant. Finally, with the release of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, more differences appeared and critical plot conclusions were either reduced or removed. The overall effect of the entire movie series was that it told a story that was recognizably that of Tolkien's, but it did so with major thematic and other differences, which caused varying reactions among fans. These differences were not, however, of any importance to the movie's target audience— the enormous worldwide movie going public most of whom knew nothing of the story. Despite the differences, The Lord of the Rings motion pictures are beautiful and stunning epic movies that tell a great story in their own right.

The fact that the movies are considered a great achievement of movie-making is due, in part, to some of the changes that were required for screen adaptation. The most understandable differences in the screenplay from the story are those that were required to contract the duration of the film and keep up its pace. Even with substantial portions of the story excised in the screenplay, the three, extended-edition movies have a combined running time of well over eleven hours, and there is arguably enough material not filmed to make a fourth, extended-length motion picture. Considering the relative unimportance— to the general story— of some of the the missing material, it was probably a wise decision to not include it. Another important consideration in filming a motion picture is the pace at which the story moves. For example, the Council of Elrond is a lengthy episode in Tolkien's book, The Fellowship of the Ring, in which much historical material and explanations of off-camera events are provided. If this episode had been filmed as written, it likely would have run on over an hour. Instead, the material was presented in a different way that kept the pace of the plot speed up for the medium.

Some differences between the story and the screenplay, however, are less easy to justify. Characters in the screenplay were developed very differently to those in the story, and they were made to do things that seemed contrary to their personalities. Moreover, major differences of theme exist— differences that do not seem to make sense or be entirely necessary for film adaption. For example, the result of the Entmoot in the movie is that the Ents decide not to go to war, before Pippin gets Treebeard to go south, saying the Hobbits will be safer that way. In fact his plan is that Treebeard will see the ruin Isengard has caused and the Ents then go to war anyway. It is fair to ask why they could not have just agreed to go to war in the film as they had in the book. Such differences, though unnoticeable to those who had never read the story, disappointed some fans of the book, while again others did not mind. On the other hand, the film's creators stated that the scene had been added to make Pippin more than just "useless baggage." In that context it succeeded.

Chronology

Timeline

Timeline suggested, positing that there is a one year gap instead of 17 years between Bilbo's 111st birthday and Fellowship.

The movies do not follow Tolkien's timeline of events. This was most likely done to move the plot along faster. The biggest indicator of this change is Frodo's age during The Fellowship of the Ring.

Frodo is considerably younger in the film than the book. In the book, he begins his quest at age 50, 17 years after Bilbo's 111th birthday and the passing of the One Ring from Bilbo to Frodo. In the film, this gap does not appear to exist; while there is time between the party and Gandalf's reappearance, Frodo's youthful appearance does not support a gap of 17 years. While Hobbits may age more slowly than Men, Bilbo's appearance in The Hobbit film trilogy shows a firm movie-verse example of a 50-year-old hobbit, an appearance not shared by Frodo in the Lord of the Rings films, who hasn't aged since the birthday party; although this aging may be due to the One Ring.

The film also positions Merry and Pippin as age-contemporaries to Frodo and Sam, a dynamic not seen in the book, where they are quite a bit younger (Merry is 36 and Pippin is 28). This timeline shift of the trilogy alters other aspects of the film-verse timeline, such as the birth year of Aragorn, since he states his age, 87, in The Two Towers to Éowyn. (Book Birth TA 2931 VS Movie Birth TA 2916)

This change is significant because it explains Thranduil's words to Legolas at the end of The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies. In the book timeline, Aragorn was only 10 during the Battle of Five Armies, meaning he was still living in Rivendell and had yet to be given the name Strider. With the revised timeline, Aragorn is 25 during the same period, five years after he left Rivendell, but 2 years before he goes to fight for Gondor and Rohan, a time when he was living with the Dúnedain. This change connects these two film moments into a clear logical timeline.

Arrangement of story threads

Tolkien's story was written in such a way that separate threads eventually emerge for the activities of the various characters. At one time, as many as four threads of the story existed. These threads were organized in such a way that multiple chapters could advance a single thread well along before switching to another. This is especially true of The Two Towers and The Return of the King. The first half of The Two Towers carried forward the events of the Fellowship in the lands of Rohan including the Battle of the Hornburg, and the second half took Frodo through the Emyn Muil on his journey toward Mordor and ending with his imprisonment in the Tower of Cirith Ungol. The first half of The Return of the King then switches back to the West to tell of the war in Gondor through to the challenge of Sauron at the Black Gate by the Captains of the West. This allows each thread to expand a substantial amount before switching into another thread.

In the movies, the threads are switched much more frequently, and this is probably a necessity of the medium. One could easily forget the plight of one character while spending much time with another. Moreover, the synchronicity of events was much easier to follow with the frequent switching than it would have been had the screenplay been written as the book. This was definitely a case in which the medium dictated the form.

Excluded material

Of a total of sixty-two chapters in the three-volume book set, little to none was filmed from nine of them. These are indicated in red. Another thirty-one chapters had substantial portions left out of the screenplay. These are indicated in blue. The Remaining twenty-two chapters—less than half of the total—had most or all of their material included. These are indicated in green.

[knapplc]

Peter Jackson is such a moron. He can make films, but he doesn't understand storytelling.

 

He got the preamble of this scene correct. But he didn't grasp the impact of the several parts of the story, and he badly messed up the disposition of a great scene. He had no idea why the words they said needed to come in the order they did, or why that order had import.

 

Theoden led the Rohirrim through the gaps in the Rammas, and into the Pelennor Fields. Jackson got it right that Theoden saw the enemy's disposition. He ordered his serried ranks for battle. And then he charged.

 

The Rohirrim did not shout "DEATH" before that charge. They were a skilled and deadly order of knights. They did not fear, or anticipate death. They charged, and they shore through the enemy like scythes in a field of wheat. Theoden's onslaught clove through the Orc pikes and archers all the way to the Haradrim, and Theoden and his knights sweep through them. He is triumphant on the field until the Nazgul swoop down.

 

In the book there is one of the greatest scenes of 20th century literature, where Eowyn, unhorsed, reels up against the black horror resting on Theoden and Snowmane. And when he tells her that no living man may hinder him, she scoffs, and says, "But no living man am I! You look upon a woman! Eowyn am I, Eomund's daughter, and you stand between me and my lord and kin. Begone if you be not deathless! For living, or dark undead, I will smite you if you touch him!"

 

And the Nazgul attacks her, but "slender, yet as a steel blade" she beheads the monster, and although the deadly wraith shatters her arm, with Merry's help she defeats him. And as she does, she is stricken down by her enemy.

 

Eomer, triumphant on his part of the field, sweeps upon the scene with his knights. And when he recognizes Snowmane, and Theoden's banner, he unmounts and bows to pay his respect to his fallen lord.

 

And then he sees his sister, Eowyn, fallen and seemingly dead. And in his might and wrath, he returns to his horse, orders his forces, and arranges the battle.

 

At that point, after Eomer sees his king and his sister dead (dead), at THAT point Eomer orders his knights to what he perceives to be a futile fight. At that point, leading the Rohirrim, he shouts DEATH!

 

And as one, they respond. DEATH!

 

And then they charge.

 

Jackson just wholly ganks this up. He's so wrapped up in smelling his own farts that he fumbles the impact of this scene. His movie is good, don't get me wrong. But it could have been so, so much better if he had just followed along with the majesty already crafted by the master storyteller.

 

---

 

 

 

Edit - but yeah. Let's go get the Wolverines. Go Big Red!

[funhusker]

I slept through like 90 minutes of the first one, and didn’t feel like I missed a thing.  Never bothered to rewatch or move on to the next.

 

My hot take:  LOTR might be one of the most boring epics ever made on screen.

[AZRaiderH8r]

2 hours ago, funhusker said:

I slept through like 90 minutes of the first one, and didn’t feel like I missed a thing.  Never bothered to rewatch or move on to the next.

 

My hot take:  LOTR might be one of the most boring epics ever made on screen.

I'm with you. I just don't get the love of those films. I found them to be incredibly boring, and I've taken a lot of heat for that. 

[Micheal]

Love the Lord of the Rings! Loved reading the books and need to again! 

 

No film can do them justice. Just not possible! 

 

Also are the wolverines "orcs" for us this week? 

[LennynSquiggy]

12 hours ago, knapplc said:

Peter Jackson is such a moron. He can make films, but he doesn't understand storytelling.

 

He got the preamble of this scene correct. But he didn't grasp the impact of the several parts of the story, and he badly messed up the disposition of a great scene. He had no idea why the words they said needed to come in the order they did, or why that order had import.

 

Theoden led the Rohirrim through the gaps in the Rammas, and into the Pelennor Fields. Jackson got it right that Theoden saw the enemy's disposition. He ordered his serried ranks for battle. And then he charged.

 

The Rohirrim did not shout "DEATH" before that charge. They were a skilled and deadly order of knights. They did not fear, or anticipate death. They charged, and they shore through the enemy like scythes in a field of wheat. Theoden's onslaught clove through the Orc pikes and archers all the way to the Haradrim, and Theoden and his knights sweep through them. He is triumphant on the field until the Nazgul swoop down.

 

In the book there is one of the greatest scenes of 20th century literature, where Eowyn, unhorsed, reels up against the black horror resting on Theoden and Snowmane. And when he tells her that no living man may hinder him, she scoffs, and says, "But no living man am I! You look upon a woman! Eowyn am I, Eomund's daughter, and you stand between me and my lord and kin. Begone if you be not deathless! For living, or dark undead, I will smite you if you touch him!"

 

And the Nazgul attacks her, but "slender, yet as a steel blade" she beheads the monster, and although the deadly wraith shatters her arm, with Merry's help she defeats him. And as she does, she is stricken down by her enemy.

 

Eomer, triumphant on his part of the field, sweeps upon the scene with his knights. And when he recognizes Snowmane, and Theoden's banner, he unmounts and bows to pay his respect to his fallen lord.

 

And then he sees his sister, Eowyn, fallen and seemingly dead. And in his might and wrath, he returns to his horse, orders his forces, and arranges the battle.

 

At that point, after Eomer sees his king and his sister dead (dead), at THAT point Eomer orders his knights to what he perceives to be a futile fight. At that point, leading the Rohirrim, he shouts DEATH!

 

And as one, they respond. DEATH!

 

And then they charge.

 

Jackson just wholly ganks this up. He's so wrapped up in smelling his own farts that he fumbles the impact of this scene. His movie is good, don't get me wrong. But it could have been so, so much better if he had just followed along with the majesty already crafted by the master storyteller.

 

 

---

 

 

 

Edit - but yeah. Let's go get the Wolverines. Go Big Red!

Considering how badly Amazon screwed up the Wheel of Time books, Peter Jackson did a fantastic job of sticking to Tolkien's storyline.

[Micheal]

7 minutes ago, LennynSquiggy said:

Considering how badly Amazon screwed up the Wheel of Time books, Peter Jackson did a fantastic job of sticking to Tolkien's storyline.

Yeah that is what I was thinking! Jackson could have done so much worse hahah. I know his movies aren't perfect but decently accurate. 

 

I want to read The Silmarillion sometime. 

 

Also what do we think are the Wolverine's weaknesses? 

[LennynSquiggy]

28 minutes ago, Micheal said:

Also what do we think are the Wolverine's weaknesses? 

They're Orcs so...

[runningblind]

55 minutes ago, LennynSquiggy said:

Considering how badly Amazon screwed up the Wheel of Time books, Peter Jackson did a fantastic job of sticking to Tolkien's storyline.

No movie can ever replicate what a good author can conjur in one's imagination.  Time limits, budgets etc. will always make movies different.  Understand that going in and they can be enjoyable in their own right. I love the movies and I loved the books too, no reason you can't have both.

[Lorewarn]

39 minutes ago, runningblind said:

No movie can ever replicate what a good author can conjur in one's imagination.  Time limits, budgets etc. will always make movies different.  Understand that going in and they can be enjoyable in their own right. I love the movies and I loved the books too, no reason you can't have both.

 

 

This is essentially what Tolkien more or less believed. True fantasy takes place within the inner world of the mind, and film/stage performance can never rise to the occasion if for no other reason than the fact that you have things and people pretending (ie actors)

[LennynSquiggy]

7 hours ago, runningblind said:

No movie can ever replicate what a good author can conjur in one's imagination.  Time limits, budgets etc. will always make movies different.  Understand that going in and they can be enjoyable in their own right. I love the movies and I loved the books too, no reason you can't have both.

Amazon should have named it something else because the "series" is so far off from the books that it might as well be a different story. These aren't just minor differences either, these are major departures from the books.

[LennynSquiggy]

9 hours ago, AZRaiderH8r said:

I'm with you. I just don't get the love of those films. I found them to be incredibly boring, and I've taken a lot of heat for that. 

[Stone Cold]

Huh, not how i saw this going.  Kinda destroyed it actually

[Cdog923]

On 9/24/2023 at 10:28 PM, knapplc said:

Peter Jackson is such a moron. He can make films, but he doesn't understand storytelling.

 

He got the preamble of this scene correct. But he didn't grasp the impact of the several parts of the story, and he badly messed up the disposition of a great scene. He had no idea why the words they said needed to come in the order they did, or why that order had import.

 

Theoden led the Rohirrim through the gaps in the Rammas, and into the Pelennor Fields. Jackson got it right that Theoden saw the enemy's disposition. He ordered his serried ranks for battle. And then he charged.

 

The Rohirrim did not shout "DEATH" before that charge. They were a skilled and deadly order of knights. They did not fear, or anticipate death. They charged, and they shore through the enemy like scythes in a field of wheat. Theoden's onslaught clove through the Orc pikes and archers all the way to the Haradrim, and Theoden and his knights sweep through them. He is triumphant on the field until the Nazgul swoop down.

 

In the book there is one of the greatest scenes of 20th century literature, where Eowyn, unhorsed, reels up against the black horror resting on Theoden and Snowmane. And when he tells her that no living man may hinder him, she scoffs, and says, "But no living man am I! You look upon a woman! Eowyn am I, Eomund's daughter, and you stand between me and my lord and kin. Begone if you be not deathless! For living, or dark undead, I will smite you if you touch him!"

 

And the Nazgul attacks her, but "slender, yet as a steel blade" she beheads the monster, and although the deadly wraith shatters her arm, with Merry's help she defeats him. And as she does, she is stricken down by her enemy.

 

Eomer, triumphant on his part of the field, sweeps upon the scene with his knights. And when he recognizes Snowmane, and Theoden's banner, he unmounts and bows to pay his respect to his fallen lord.

 

And then he sees his sister, Eowyn, fallen and seemingly dead. And in his might and wrath, he returns to his horse, orders his forces, and arranges the battle.

 

At that point, after Eomer sees his king and his sister dead (dead), at THAT point Eomer orders his knights to what he perceives to be a futile fight. At that point, leading the Rohirrim, he shouts DEATH!

 

And as one, they respond. DEATH!

 

And then they charge.

 

Jackson just wholly ganks this up. He's so wrapped up in smelling his own farts that he fumbles the impact of this scene. His movie is good, don't get me wrong. But it could have been so, so much better if he had just followed along with the majesty already crafted by the master storyteller.

 

 

---

 

 

 

Edit - but yeah. Let's go get the Wolverines. Go Big Red!

 

You have over 62,000 posts; a majority of them good-to-great.

 

This might be your masterpiece. 

[Cdog923]

On 9/25/2023 at 10:59 AM, LennynSquiggy said:

Considering how badly Amazon screwed up the Wheel of Time books, Peter Jackson did a fantastic job of sticking to Tolkien's storyline.

 

Considering how badly Amazon screwed up the Lord of the Rings books, Peter Jackson did a fantastic job of sticking to Tolkien's storyline.