Peter Jackson

[Gawain]

Hi all

Can someone please explain to me why there is such hatred towards Peter Jackson? Sure he botched (by all accounts) the greatest literary work ever written. But is that reason enough to condemn him so fiercely? Name one person that could have done a better job. Looking at the fanatical ravings of some of you people I don’t think God him/herself could have got it right.

Instead of abusing PJ, I think that he should be applauded for the courage he has shown putting such a great and well loved book to film. I’m sure he would have known that he was advancing his credibility through very hostile territory when he took on the job of directing TLotR. Sure, I don’t agree with the Arwen thing, the wizard battle etc. Yet I don’t hold any Ill-feelings against PJ for these mistakes.

Take a step back, take a look at what is going on, then ask yourselves, “Is it really that important?” Remember, we still have the writings of Tolkien. Peter Jackson hasn’t stolen them away like some thief in the night. I think that if you really loved the books, this film wouldn’t worry you at all. After all, it’s not the movie that is The Lord of the Rings. The Lord of the Rings is the work of JRR Tolkien. We still have in our hearts the glorious vista that is Middle-earth. The legends and heroes that Tolkien created will still live the way he intended – within our imaginations. No one can take that away!

Gawain

PS: I won’t be seeing the movie. Not because of what PJ has done with it, but simply because I don’t want to. The books have always been enough for me

[Moose]

welcome to the forum. I haven't been here very long, but can say I have enjoyed the time I've spent here discussing the works of Tolkien.

I can forgive some of the PJ bashing here, mostly because in my mind anyway, he deserves it. Had I done the same thing I would expect the same. You will, however, find many posts here thanking him for finally bringing his adaptation of the film to big screen. I fit into both catagories. I really can't stand some of the changes he has made to his vision of The Lord of The Rings, but am greatful that someone finally did it.

I have seen the movie and have posted my review on another thread http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1203 at the same time I'm not one of the "mover and shakers" in Holywood so I know that PJ probably doen't care one way or the other about my opinion. But who knows maybe he does.

Just my thoughts,
Moose

[Peevan]

I personally believe that it is NOT too late for PJ to get some flavor of the feedback that this movie generates, and make appropriate mods to the next installment. Maybe that was the intent all along.

I really enjoyed the movie...a lot. I am glad a serious attempt has been made to bring it to movie form. I therefore am able to see past the changes and cuts made, recognizing that, alas, that is what has to be done in bringing it to the screen. It still did a wonderful job capturing the story of the FotR.

Hell, I would have sat through 4 or 5 hours if it was as well done as this and included more of the book.

Anyway, I just wonder that if the critics (the ultra Tolkien purists) are TOO voiceful, certain things can still be done or added to the stuff that already exists for the next two installments???

:confused: :)

[sergei]

I have to partly agree with Gawain. However,The film is an INTERPRETATION of the book, it is NOT intended as a perfect mirror image of it. I have read and loved the book for nearly 30 years and I dislike many "fantasy" books and films that have tried to mimic Tolkiens work, but to me this film is superb.

You can argue all day about whether Arwen should have the role she does, and the wizards fighting, but (correct me if I am wrong) in the book it doesn't say that Gandalf and Saruman DIDN'T fight when they meet at Orthanc, so whats the problem with interpreting their meeting in that way ? would Gandalf have submitted to Saruman without a fight ?

Gawain, my friend, keep your "glorious vista" intact (as I have with mine), but watch the film with an open mind, don't sit there waiting for things to critisize, just enjoy it for what it is..............BRILLIANT !!!!

[Greymantle]

What it says, if I remember correctly, is what happens during their discussion, and then it says that Gandalf is taken to the top of the tower. There is no mention of a fight, and Gandalf would have been extremely stupid to try, in the very center of his enemy's power, surrounded by half-orcs, Uruk-Hai and evil Men. Sorry, I'm typing a lot of run-on sentences today, I have a cold and it's the last day of school, so I'm too dopey at the moment to worry about my grammar!

There's been a lot of talk about how this is simply an "interpretation." I see no basis for this. Interpretation, from my perspective, would mean deciding that the Balrog would have wings, or making mallorn trees such-and-such height, or making Gollum's voice sound like this or that. Differences from our own imaginations are entirely understandable. However, Mr. Jackson's perversion goes far beyond that. I fail to see how direct contradiction of the plot of the novel, in many places, can be considered "interpretation."

[Moose]

The whole part of the "Wizard's Duel" was just silly to me. Having Gandalf spinning around in the middle of the floor, like some cattywampus top, on his head was ludicrous and demeaning to Gandalf’s character. Not only that it takes up about 20 minutes of the movie, or seems to anyway. If they (PJ and company) hadn’t put in this one part, which isn’t even in the book, they could have had Tom Bombadil, Old Forest, Barrow weights and all, in the movie.

Overall though, I was impressed with the movie. I had to “displace” my objectivity, watch it as an adaptation of The Lord of The Rings and had a much better time of it, minus a few aggravating parts.

Moose

[markrob]

I agree that PJ shouldnt be bashed. I disagree that he botched the film. How can you even say that without seeing the damn thing!

[Greymantle]

By not walking through life with my eyes closed and my ears plugged. that's how. It's not as if I know nothing about the movie simply because I haven't seen it. PJ and his arrogant cronies have been touting their abomination worldwide for months.

[markrob]

I would expect a reply like that from some one who was wiping their butt with pages from the Hobbit by the time I had read Tolkien's work more times than you are old. Appreciate the fact that his world has come to life and is now getting the exposure his literary work deserves. Stick to Harry Potter, thats more your speed.

[Moose]

between you and the feller you are bad mouthing sure makes some folks awful brave.

Strong words there, Markrob.

Just my thoughts,
Moose

[Peevan]

OK....I have to agree with others that that Wizards duel was just SILLY.

I still really liked the movie.

:D

[Gawain]

'Botched' might have been the wrong word. 'Unpopular re-telling' would be a better way to descibe the movie. Though only among Tolkien fans. Though I think, markrob, that you misunderstood what I was trying to get at originally. If it had been Cameron, Lucas or any other director, they would be suffering the slings and arrows that PJ is currently enduring. PJ did a job, the best way he saw fit, and that is it! Love or hate the movie, it is what it is. Personal abuse towards PJ - as seen in the post by Mike B - is uncalled for.

Remember dignity and civility? A couple of things that were so evident in Tolkiens writings. Screaming and abusing Peter Jackson only belittles one person... the person doing the screaming and abusing.

Gawain

[Beorn]

I'm finding that many people are giving...er...references to my post. I do not feel sorry. I feel good. I unleashed my anger. I felt that PJ had done too much, gone too far, corrupted the movie, and changed Tolkien's work. He claimed to be bringing the Fellowship of the Ring to the screen, but what he did was he brought a movie based on the Fellowship of the Ring to the silver screen.

There were so many changes uncalled for. Simple things like dates, ages, and numbers are screwed up. That...angers me because they were, like I said, uncalled for. I completely understand that Tom needed to be cut, but the thing is, the whole Arwen thing was just completely pointless. Glorfindel was an elf lord. He was one of the few who could scare the dark riders.

And, I know there is only a 1 in 1000000 chance that PJ will read my post, so I know that it actually isn't hurting him, except by affecting the masses of our forum, which still makes up a minute percentage of the Tolkien Loving Population. I'm not damning him because I know he won't read it, I'm damning him because he lied, because he did so much that was, again, uncalled for.

Yes, we all remember dignity and civility. It's just that in fierce anger because of the destruction of your favorite book, you are bound to say things that indignant, and uncouth. I know that. I accept the fact that I wrote some pretty nasty stuff, but I will not remove it, it reflects how I felt just after I saw the movie

[Thorin]

Originally posted by markrob
I would expect a reply like that from some one who was wiping their butt with pages from the Hobbit by the time I had read Tolkien's work more times than you are old. Appreciate the fact that his world has come to life and is now getting the exposure his literary work deserves. Stick to Harry Potter, thats more your speed.

For your information, markrob. I have been reading Tolkien's work as many times and more than Greymantle's age and I say that you are an ignorant person who cares more about the thought of Tolkien's work on the scene then having a true effort at remaining true to Tolkien's work.

Sure, PJ can be commending for his effort on bringing the book to the screen. If he was the fan he was claiming to be, he would have been more sensitive to fans of the book (like Columbus did when filming Harry Potter) and to the wants and wishes of Tolkien himself when he wanted his characters to remain true to what he intended. Greymantle is right. Director's interpretation or vision does not mean altering four characters and their deeds (Frodo, Arwen, Glorfindel and Elrond) in the distorting of Arwen's character. For being a Tolkien fan, PJ sure doesn't seem to care too much about Tolkien as much as trying to make this his own. And no matter how much you want to justify it, PJ (as a Tolkien fan) is WRONG in the sensless changes he has made....even while being commended for attempting it.

[Greymantle]

Originally posted by markrob
I would expect a reply like that from some one who was wiping their butt with pages from the Hobbit by the time I had read Tolkien's work more times than you are old. Appreciate the fact that his world has come to life and is now getting the exposure his literary work deserves. Stick to Harry Potter, thats more your speed.

My, how polite. I hope plenty of people see this so they no not to listen to such an immature person.
For any fan, I'm sure that Tolkien's work has always been alive, and doesn't need the essay of vandalism that is this film to bring "his world to life." Don't try to say that Tolkien has not gotten exposure. How you ever met someone who hasn't heard of The Lord of the Rings? Tolkien has probably the greatest single infulence on the development of the modern fantasy genre.
And as for you last comment, I really don't see how you can see fit to make a comment about the "speed" of a creative work when you are so avidly defending a movie that was created, from your view, in order to bring Tolkien's world to life. It would seem that the Lord of the Rings movies are more "your speed" than the real thing.

[Fairlite]

That's right the movie is BASED on the book, all movies from books are BASED on them. They are NEVER complete mirrors. It is impossible to do that.

[Thorin]

Yes, Fairlite, movies are based on the books so we should expect some changes. Not, however, the horrible liberties PJ has unneccasarily taken all the while claiming to be a Tolkien fan making the movie true blue to the book. The problem lies with PJ and the way NLC has been marketing the movie. PJ's intent (at least what was portrayed to the public) was to create a movie true and accurate to Tolkien's epic. "PJ is a Tolkien fan so, fans, be assured that it will be accurate and to your satisfaction!" As a Tolkien fan wanting not just to make a movie, but to pay homage to Tolkien, he should be expected to do just that...make a true and accurate movie.

He has not done that. He has altered much of the characters (sometimes horribly as in Arwen) and added his own characters and scenes. He has cut events out for "lack of time" factors, yet added in his own creations to fill that cut time. All the while the media is making it all look like God's gift to Tolkien-ism. Nobody is standing out and saying, "Listen, either call it a personal interpretation based on JRR's LoTR, or put your money where your mouth is and try to make a movie that all fans can be proud of." Instead he has sold out to the action movie genre and political correctness all the while claiming to be doing it for the fans. PJ has not been honest with everyone.

[Unicef]

Originally posted by Greymantle
By not walking through life with my eyes closed and my ears plugged. that's how. It's not as if I know nothing about the movie simply because I haven't seen it. PJ and his arrogant cronies have been touting their abomination worldwide for months.

Greymantle - you seem to be quite an intelligent person, and I respect your love for these books, but how can you "know" everything that was done regarding these movies? Seems like "arrogance" shows up everywhere huh?

There have been other threads discussing various pieces of the book being on the cutting room floor, what if those scenes simply didn't work??

I will not let this interpretation of the story bother me one bit.

If it bothers you so much than, why don't you take up the gauntlet and show me HOW everything from the books could be fit into a movie that the masses will enjoy. Or show me how the movie would be made so that a limited audience would appreciate the accuracy of detail (and tell me how you're going to pull of the financing).

Caveat: I have read LOTR approx. 8 times over the past 20 years, and my interest in visiting this site was piqued by the release of FOTR. However, I have visited other boards here, and thanks to postings by Ancalagon and others, I'm going to pick up the Silmarillion and re-read it. Gee I guess nothing positive can come from this movie huh?

I'm also going to take a break from reading these boards, enjoy an extended holiday weekend, and appreciate that there is more to life than worrying about someone's interpretation of a book/movie.

I hope everyone has an enjoyable New Years/Christmas/Kwanza/Hannukah/Ramadan, etc.

Cheers,

Unicef

[Thorin]

Unicef,

You asked how everything from the book could be fit into the movie. Nobody is saying that should or could be done. I will ask you these questions as to whether or not PJ (or any competent director) could and should have done the following things. I believe PJ could have done these things and it would have been a better movie. Even with leaving in the wizard's duel and orcs from pods and cutting Bombadil and the Scouring of the Shire with these little changes below, it could have been acceptable even by a purists standpoint.

PJ could have followed the book and Tolkien's intentions by:

1) Leaving the scene at the Ford the way it was written. It is more exciting and inspiring then the travesty PJ put out.

2) Making Lorien a more happier and magical place then a gloomy setting, and including the gift ceremony where each character gets to bond with Galadriel.

3) Keeping the Council of Elrond much more accurate (the presence of Bilbo, not as many members and indoors around a table) and still could have cut out much of the verbal history using flashbacks. (Like they did with Isildur)

4) Having Pippen leave the Shire with Frodo and Sam and meet up with Merry after Gamgee.

5) Keeping Gandalf more calmer and in control, which would have made his character more ominous and powerful.

6) Having Pippen throw down a stone and awakening the hammer blows which would have made the scene more creepier than clumsily knocking down a dwarf skeleton.

7) Not fabricating the scene where Boromir fingers the ring on Caradhras uses up one of his Amon Hen lines, then willingly gives it back. Such a scene along with Frodo putting his ring on a pedestal with everyone watching it diminishes the power of the ring over the individual (Frodo). As a matter of fact, PJ totally contradicts himself when he makes Bilbo look like a little monster in Frodo's eyes when he wants to see the ring, yet has Frodo willingly put it out for everyone in the council of Elrond to see, nevermind have Gimli try to axe it to death.

8) Not having the Fellowship volunteer themselves instead of being appointed by Elrond.

These and many others that other people could and should mention, are all changes and additions that WERE NOT NEEDED and do not stay true to the book like PJ says it is. Any competent director could do these scenes and keep them as written. There was no need to change them. No time factor, no difficulty in camera work, no incompetent actors or stage hands or special effects problems. There was no need to change these things! Why? Why not stay true to the little things that mean a whole lot? Why claim to be so true to the book and yet do these ridiculous changes that do take away from a lot of the character development and plot that Tolkien intended?

[markrob]

Thorin

You have actually posted some pretty critical mishaps but your number 6 is absolutely ludicrious. For the love of god it doesnt matter what Pippin accidently knocked down the well, the point was conveyed and it was dramatic, sure a stone was used in the book but a defeated and defender of Balin's tomb works for the movie version and the its not the end of the world , live with it!!!!

[Talierin]

Okay, this is going to sound really lame and super nit-picky, but it wasn't so much the skeleton for me as it was the stupid spiderwebs covering the thing! I HATE FAKE SPIDERWEBS!!!!

[ReadWryt]

Ok, here goes again...

Peter Jackson has said repeatedly, and I will gladly post the links to the quotes for you upon request, that he was NOT making major changes to characters, that he and the cast read straight out of the book before shooting each scene, that he was going to make the movie fit the intent of Tolkien and that he listened to the Fans to see what was important to them.

Truth to be told he did none of this outside of reading the book with the cast, that I cannot prove either way, though this would lead me to feel sorry for the poor slob playing that rediculous invention Lurtz.

Making Gandalf a less then dignified spluttering madman, turning Arwen into some sword wielding Elven Witch (Thus making her brave enough to face the gut wrenching and Mind Bogglingly frightening Nazgul without breaking a sweat while diminishing not only THEIR characters but erasing Glorfindel, damaging the strength and import of Elrond and making Frodo a mere observer in his own adventure.) and converting Saruman to Sauron's lap dog are all MAJOR changes to characters...Fans said this repeatedly in EVERY venue they could on the Internet...repeatedly.

He seemed to have captured the Setting well enough, making judicious use of the artists who have come to be recognized widely for their illustrations of Tolkien's work in the past, and the basic plot is unaltered, Middle-aged Hobbit saves the world by overcoming the odds on his way to destroy the One Ring, but alas the characters are "Botched" quite badly.

Finally, the statements P.J. has made about "Tolkien's intent". There was a letter written to one Forrest J. Ackerman back in the late 50's when Disney was working on a version of the movie...it is letter #210 in the yr 2000 edition of The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien,

"I do earnestly hope that in the assignment of actual speeches to the characters they will be represented as I have presented them: in style and sentiment. I should resent perversions of the characters (and do resent it, so far as it apears in this sketch) even more than the spoiling of the Plot and Scenery."


So you see, Peter Jackson did the precise OPPOSITE of Tolkien's desire...he got the Plot and Scenery right and screwed the characters into the ground...of course they had a left hand screw because of the Chorialis effect, this movie being filmed in New Zealand and all...but still..

[Greymantle]

Originally posted by J.R.R. Tolkien

"I do earnestly hope that in the assignment of actual speeches to the characters they will be represented as I have presented them: in style and sentiment. I should resent perversions of the characters (and do resent it, so far as it apears in this sketch) even more than the spoiling of the Plot and Scenery."


I went into the movie expecting to come out mad about plot changes, but to my horrorr, the gross misrepresentations of nearly every character in the book affected me more than anything else. I can hardly think of a single character that remained true either to factual descriptions or to the "spirit" that the film creators seem so fond of referring to.
The portrayal of Elrond was simply hideous. Not a great lord of wisdom, power, kindess and healing; he was a bitter, cantankerous old jerk with a hatred for everything not Elven. As if.
As stated by many before, Gandalf came off as a bumbling old fool... but even more, the wisdom and centeredness for which he is so well known were neither of them apparently present. He seemed to be making all of his decisions while sitting in Bag End...then of course there's his "frenzy." And the movie had Frodo as the one solving the riddle of the doors. Gandalf also seemed a bit over-fond of hugging lots of hobbits...
Aragorn, my god! All this **** about him feeling as though he has to make up for the failings of Isildur, and that his forefathers were the reason for the rise of Sauron... and this was obviously very intentional. One of the writers (Boyd, I think) is quoted to have said things to that effect. I don't have the paper on hand, but it made me gag.
Arwen.... It was far worse than I had expected, even. When she first appeared, I was reminded of an ad for laundry detergent... as for the rest of her ****, I needn't expound upon it.
Merry and Pippin, the comic relief duo with the Irish accents. I don't remember a single thing they did in the movie that was actually from the book, other than their existence in the Fellowship and the fact that they were captured by Orcs. Seriously.
Saruman, Saruman... well, he turns bad, they got that right. He cross-breeds Men and Orcs, I suppose that's right to. And as for the rest...
Pretty much anything with Elves in it stank... they did not come across as beings of beauty, grace, wisdom, or power; just a bunch of shiny jerks who like to be nasty to anyone around them. And I mean, please. Galadriel in form-fitting body armor? Don't make me throw up again.
Sam and Boromir were the only two with really decent saving qualities... despite the removal of the servant/master relationship, I though Sam's character came over very well. I thought that Boromir seemed a lot like most readers' perception of him. Recently I've gained a greater admiration for him than I've had in the past, and it showed itself somewhat in the movie, at least at the end. But I agree with whomever said this before.... Grond, was it? His horn sounded like a very sick goose. If Theoden's horn ends up sounding like that I'll walk out of the theatre.
Wow, I didn't really mean to go off like that.... and I had many more complaints about the movie (Lothlorien! Oh my God! I could have cried, how simply disgusting!) but I'll leave them for the coming weeks. There's also a whole lot more to be said about characters alone... but hey. I need to go to bed.

[LadyGaladriel]

I was very much impressed with Pj. I loved the film and thought it deserved the critical acclaim and the attention it got.
I have a couple of things to say to all you "tolkien fans" people out there.


1)I expected changes and anyone who didn't was a total fool of a took . I could have most definatly sat for 12 hours watching it but the majority can not.

2) The whole Arwen thing. Right , I read somewhere that pj had to make sure that more female people were in it with dominate roles. Tolkien wrote a very much male book.

3) Elves. The elves were beautifull and elegant . agree that Elrond was a bit off course but I like Legolas :)

4) wizards duel , what did you expect? I mean what did you think would happen?! The Staff is a wizards weapon . did you think that they would pull out axes?!

5)Pippins stone. I can nit pick too! Gimli didn't throw his hood over his face after seeing Balins tomb! NOOOOOoooooo the whole movie was terrible!

TAKE THE MOVIE AS IT IS! A VERY VERY VERY GOOD MOVIE.

[Aerin]

For me, it wasn't so much the changes in the plot that ticked me off; it was that PJ and his gang said they were sticking right to what Tolkien wrote.

I walked into the theatre on December 19 with the highest of hopes and anticipation of what I would see. I had been waiting for the movie to come out for about a year, I had gotten tickets in advance, and I arrived early to ensure a seat in the over-crowded theatre. I had watched every trailer and snippet I could possibly find for FotR, and had read as many of the "spy reports" as I had time for. I even had many of the still pictures from the movie saved on my computer, just so I could look at them at home.

I was extremely excited when we finally got into the theatre and the movie started. That was the end of my excitement. When I saw Gandalf hugging Hobbits and shooting off fireworks for the Hobbit children, I wondered if that could really be the character he was supposedly portraying.
Not to mention the Wizards' Duel scene... it looked like something out of the Matrix and made me want to gag. Why would Gandalf have challenged Saruman's power like that? He himself said that Saruman was the wisest (and therefore most powerful) wizard in the order; it would have been insubordination to fight a superior in that way.
And when Gandalf was finally on top of the tower, it sickened me to see him sitting there in the rain like a sulking child. This wasn't the Gandalf of majesty and power that I knew from Tolkien's works. This supposition of Gandalf showed him to truly be a "conjurer of cheap tricks".

The Hobbits really disappointed me. I could take Merry and Pippin's firework mischief; but not running from Farmer Maggot's with carrots and cabbages. (Frodo told the tale of being chased off Maggot's farm because he was stealing mushrooms in the book.)
Frodo and Sam seemed too young to play their roles well; in the book, Frodo was somewhere around 50 when he set off for Rivendell.. not 21.
Pippin's dropping the skeleton down the well was rather cheesy; it would have been just as easy for PJ to have him drop a *gasp* stone down the well to waken the drums of Moria.
One thing I must say about the Hobbits, their courage in sticking together was a fair portrayal of their comradery from the book.
The Ford of Bruinen scene did diminish the building of Frodo's character, though. In the book, Frodo overcomes the will of the Ring and of the Ringwraiths by himself; not because he's half unconcious and some Elf-witch is carrying him along.

Arwen's part was completely unnecessary. Glorfindel should have been at the Ford, partly because he was powerful enough to scare the Nine and partly because that would have given Frodo a chance to show what he was made of.
I realize that PJ wanted to make his movie more politically correct, but he did not have to do it in such a blatant way.
I'll state right now that I am a girl, and I do like strong female leads in a movie; but not overly ridiculous ones such as Arwen.
When I saw Arwen come onto the screen with her sword pointed at Aragorn's neck (not to mention that he had no idea someone was sneaking up behind him!), I was ready to demand my money back. What Ranger would be so stupid to let someone sneak up on him like that? What if it had been an Orc who snuck up so apparently quietly? The Quest would have ended right then and there.
Arwen's role in the movie was completely fabricated and utterly ridiculous.

Galadriel... oh my... she was another one in the movie who made me want to cry when I saw her. "The Witch of Lothlorien"?? What on earth is up with that? And Lorien itself looked more like a witches' lair than a grassy, light place where Elves lived.
Galadriel's little "dark woman" scene was laughable - I didn't get the sense of power, I got the sense of bad make-up and lighting. She didn't impress me in the least.
And why did they show her giving Frodo the Light of Earendil but not the Elven cloaks?

I am not personally attacking Peter Jackson in any way; I am merely critizing what he did to the storyline of The Fellowship of the Ring and how he lied to the masses by saying he was sticking to the plot.
The movie seemed, to me, an utter and complete demolition of the characters in Tolkien's work.

[LadyGaladriel]

When I saw Arwen come onto the screen with her sword pointed at Aragorn's neck (not to mention that he had no idea someone was sneaking up behind him!), I was ready to demand my money back. What Ranger would be so stupid to let someone sneak up on him like that? What if it had been an Orc who snuck up so apparently quietly?


Elves hardly ever touch the ground. (Think of Legolas on Caderous (sp) ) A ranger no matter how good he is wouldn't have heard an elf sneaking up. What about in Lorien when Haldir jumps out?!

[Aerin]

To sum up (one ;)) of my main complaints:
PJ detracted from the building of Aragorn's (among others) character in the movie. If you read the books, Aragorn is a Ranger, and his status means a whole lot more in the books than in the movie. In the movie, Rangers seem to be reduced to little more than woodsmen: scruffy looking while wandering through the forests.
In the least, should not Aragorn have noticed something while Arwen was sneaking up behind him? He shouldn't have been suprised, *if* he let someone think they were sneaking around him.
It seems that PJ doesn't really care of the character of the characters is lost in the movie, just as long as he makes a buck or two on his creation.

[LadyGaladriel]

pj is a huge fan of Lotr and to make a buck or two (even though he deserved it ) is beside the point. Pj keep in true faith with certain aspects of the books eg Gandalf and aragorn. You are forgetting my dear Aerin that there are 2 more films that will surely show you more of the rangers part. The fellowship of te ring is mostly about that. The ring.

[ReadWryt]

Arwen's part was completely unnecessary. Glorfindel should have been at the Ford, partly because he was powerful enough to scare the Nine and partly because that would have given Frodo a chance to show what he was made of.
I realize that PJ wanted to make his movie more politically correct, but he did not have to do it in such a blatant way.
I'll state right now that I am a girl, and I do like strong female leads in a movie; but not overly ridiculous ones such as Arwen.


BINGO! Galadriel is the single most powerfull female in all of Middle-earth. Were it truely just a matter of wanting to insert a more strong female character then why in the world were Galadriel's scenes CUT from the final version?? It's not actually about strong female characters so much as about sexy young female characters...which shows how Non-politically correct Jackson really is!

[Talimon]

I was just reading this over, and by the complaints people make here I get the impression that you aren't really movie people. Anyone (and I do mean anyone) who thought the scene with Pippin dropping the bucket into the well wasn't pure suspense has no clue. That scene in the book is just boring. Dropping a rock? Does that sound less cheesy to you? Pippin in the movie isn't trying to drop the dead dwarf, he's just poking him.