Who thinks PJ got a little carried away?

[Gandalf_White]

I think PJ got carried away when he created the Orcs. I mean I imagined the Orcs were ugly and evil looking, but PJ made them look disgusting. I didn't hardly watch some of the Orc parts in the movie cuz it was so gross. What do you think?

[Talimon]

Do you mean carried away in terms of making them too ugly?

I love the orcs for the simple reason that they were all different from eachother. PJ could have made them all similar but the differnet orcs actually had different personalities and looks. That made it look much more convincing, not to mention interesting.

[Gamil Zirak]

The coming out a cacoon thing was a little overboard.

[ReadWryt]

I would say that of all the things that P.J. did that could be picked upon, his visual representation of the foul and disgusting Uruks was one of the least...if not actually just fine. *Shrug*

[Ancalagon]

i did't hardly watch some of the Orc parts in the movie cuz it was so gross. What do you think?

Well that pretty much rules you out as a Surgeon or a Paramedic. :)

[Gandalf_White]

What I meant was that I thought PJ got carried away and made the orcs way too ugly and disgusting. Yeah I know I can't be a surgeon or a paramedic. I never planned on it. The one thing that grosses me out the most is blood and guts. YUCK!

[ReadWryt]

I don't know...if I was faced with making a bunch of characters I wanted an audience to fear and loathe without giving them an extensive primer on just where these things came from and all the evil they had committed in the past, I would just make them as ugly and disgusting as I could and still keep the rating I was shooting for...I mean, we really didn't get to see them fight all that much in this part of the story, so we don't know going into this how nasty these buggers are without looking at them and cringing.

[Theoden]

Originally posted by ReadWryt
I don't know...if I was faced with making a bunch of characters I wanted an audience to fear and loathe without giving them an extensive primer on just where these things came from and all the evil they had committed in the past, I would just make them as ugly and disgusting as I could and still keep the rating I was shooting for...I mean, we really didn't get to see them fight all that much in this part of the story, so we don't know going into this how nasty these buggers are without looking at them and cringing.

I think ReadWryt makes a great point here. PJ did not have the entire book of FotR to develope a dislike for the nasty things we ll know as orcs, so he had to go off of the visual side. I think he did a great job, and although before I watched the movie I had never thought of the orcs like that, it made me realize that is a lot how Tolkien discribes them.

btw, ReadWryt, I love the little fading thing you got going there... it looks really cool. :)

-me

[Xanaphia]

Pj did a great job of showing the Orcs the way they were supposed to be. They are supposed to evil, gross, because they're mutalatede elves that are dug from the ground. How could they not be gross?! It showed with excellent perfection how evil they are.

[Gandalf_White]

There is an equalizer of yes's and no's. I really like this topic.

[Shion]

I'm not sure how familiar you guys are with PJ's earlier films... but if you've seen any of them, you'll know why the Orcs are a highlight of his version of LOTR. :)

-Bon

[Talimon]

PJ has some sick films. I find them hillarious, but others just find them straight out sick. For me it's just funny though. I like them for being kind of cult films. :)

[Aragorn*9]

I think he did a great job with the whole movie. There were many things I found that were changed but he just added some more humor.
I think he had to make the orcs like that. I mean would they be scary to the hobbits if they had the pale peacful elf faces? I don't think so! Mutalatede elves is right, they have to be gross. I think PJ was just trying his hardest to stay true to the book and still have it entertaining. I think he did and did a wonderful job!

[Gamil Zirak]

You think PJ tried his hardest to stay true to the book? Please.

[Aragorn*9]

Okay, maybe that's not what I meant. I mean he had alot to try and fit in just 3 hours (yes, JUST). Tolkien was so descripted that it was hard for him to stay true to it. I mean think about it, trying to please all us fans, stay true to the book, and add a little something for others. That's gotta be hard. I think he could have done it more by the book. It's interesting to find the differences though. Like that part where Pippin knocks the skeleton in the well, that whole part is different from the book, but it's still intertaining. I think he tryed to had some humor so that it would make a better movie (Even though it would have been awesome without it).

[Gamil Zirak]

He could have left some "extra" stuff out and put in some more from the book. Now if you look at it from just a movie perspective and not compare it to the book, I think it's a good movie and quite enjoyed it.

[Aragorn*9]

I agree with you on that! I took my friend to see it and she liked it but she keeped asking me "who's that, what's going on, why'd they do that"! That's one reasone why I'm glad I read the books first!

[Gamil Zirak]

Yeah, I went opening night with my wife and she kept wanting to know what was going on. I finally saw it again a few weeks ago and got to see the TT trailer. By the way, welcome to the forum.

[Aragorn*9]

Thanks:D
I saw it with my brother for the first time in Febuary (too late, I know!), then a few weeks later with both my brothers and then with my friend, family, friend, friend! I'm gonna see it with my cousin this week I hope.

[HLGStrider]

I went with my sister and brother (plus three friends).
My sister had never read the books but she had no questions. She says that she's heard it all from me and doesn't need to know anything more... :rolleyes: Seriously, the Orcs didn't really scare me all that much... Mine were more pig like and scarier (the ones in my mind). They weren't how I wouldn't have done it, but they were still fine.

The cocoon thing was a little ridiculous, however.

[Aragorn*9]

I told my cousin about the books and the movie just about word for work. She finally went and saw it, but she didn't like it at all!! :eek: She said it gave her a stomic acke looking at them. I didn't think they were gross though! hmm:D

[Tuor]

The pool-of-slime was sort of ridiculous...and the Uruk-Hai warpaint was just dumb. All in all, though, it WAS a good movie.

[Ecthelion]

Oops. I voted for the wrong thing. No I don't think he went overboard. I pictured orcs almost that nasty.

[CyberGhostface]

I read FotR twice because I thought I kept on skipping scenes, until I found out at this forum that he changed it so much.

[Legolas_lover12]

i loved the orcs and uruk-hai. the whole pod thing was cool, but it would have been best left for another movie. i was actually laughing at them. but that was mainly becuase my friend was freaking out:rolleyes: :D
i got lotr perfectly. the movie that is. and i had never even heard of it. i just thought, well, that sounds kool, let's check it out. and now i am deeply obsessed.
my friend (the one who was freaking out) didn't get it. but she wasn't really paying attention. i mean it took me 10 minutes to finally explain to her that it was frodo not verdo or fordo. funny.
and my mom was confused. she thought boromir and aragorn were brothers.
then my other friend got it. she skimmed the first book, said it was too long and wouldn't read any more. then i tried to explain the Sil to her and since she couldn't remember Illuvatar, she started calling him Avara-froo-froo.:rolleyes: i acctually spit water on her for that. it had actuall saliva in it too. she stopped, obviously.
and my other friend saw it, but i don't think she really liked it. she would rather watch austin powers. which is brainless **** in my opinion. but that is the way she is.
anyway back to the whoel orc thing they weren't scary at all in my opinion. and i love blood and guts. i love movies where there are blood and guts. that's just the way i am. hmmmmm, maybe i should be a surgeon....................................;)

[Ecthelion]

Don't mess with Austin Powers, he completes me. YEAH BABY! YEAH!

[Ariana Undomiel]

In my oppinion, the orcs in themselves were quite acurate to the book, not necessarily in the matter of direct interpretation right out of the book, but in the fact that they are exact opposites of the elves. Remember, in the Simerillion it discusses how Melcor tortured and mutilated elves inorder to create his horrible monsters. The elves represent light, song, joy, beauty, peace, and life while the orcs portray ugliness, hate, darkness, war, and destruction. Tolkien did however get graphic in his descriptions because I don't think he felt it necessary to fill his readers heads with horrible images. PJ, as a fan of horror films, simply expanded on his imagination in order to give his audience a picture of the orcs true ugliness. I don't think that he got carried away for the most part. However, I do believe that the part when the orcs are being spawned was totally visually disgusting and unnecessary in giving the audience a view of the horror of the orcs. They already had it. Also, the part with the fight between Aragorn and Lurtz was a little too gory for my tastes. And I am not really that sensitive about violence. I just thought it wasn't necessary to go that far.

~Ariana

[Thorin II]

The orcs were portrayed that way purely to show the audience (particularly non-tolkien fans) that they are on the side of evil. I won't go overboard here.

Originally posted by Aragorn*9
I told my cousin about the books and the movie just about word for work. She finally went and saw it, but she didn't like it at all!! :eek: She said it gave her a stomic acke looking at them. I didn't think they were gross though! hmm:D

My girlfriend thought "Harry Potter was better!". She was instantly dumped. (rofl, j/k)


LMAO. Why do posts relating to personal opinion always get such a big response? And the responses you get essentially don't mean a thing.
Imagine three points of view:
"The Orcs were ugly."
"I thought they were cute."
"But I don't want a gay dog."

Do either of these make life easier? Sure. And my Mum's an elf :eek:

Thorin the Second

[Legolas_lover12]

my girlfriend thought "harry potter was better." she was instantly dumped. (rofl, j/k)

hahahahahahahaha:D:D:D:D:D
harry potter was OK. i hear the second one is gonna be much better.

[Angbor]

PJ did not just get carried away with the orcs,but with the rest of the story as well. The movie almost resembles the book, at least he got the character names right. With so many ommissions and additions to the story, He has to many loose ends to tie up in the end. One example: Merry,s sword. That sword is very important to the story, in the book it came out of the barrow. PJ has Aragorn throwing swords on the ground and tells the hobbits "you may need these." How lame. I don't want to give it away for those who did not read the book, so my advice is READ THE BOOK. It is far better than any movie will ever be, because no movie could ever capture the scope of Tolkien's masterpiece.
I feel so much better now that I got that off my chest.

[aragil]

Just a little bit of interesting (IMO) trivia for Angbor:

In the book the Hobbits' swords are found in the barrow of the last prince of Cardolan, who died in the Angmarian offensive of TA 1409. The last Dunedain of Cardolan held out in the Barrow-Downs, but apparently their prince perished. Another site where the Northern Dunedain were able to stand against Angmar (and Rhudaur) was at Weathertop, however the King of Arthedain (Arveleg I) perished in that battle and the tower was destroyed. So the interesting thing here is that Weathertop (where the swords were found in the movie) and the Barrow (where the swords were found in the books) actually have a strong historical link, one that makes sense given the swords' later usage against the King of Angmar.
(welcome to the boards Angbor)

As for PJ and the spawning of the Orcs, here are some old links which address how accurate PJ was to the books:
http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2146
http://www.thetolkienforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1431

For those who don't have access to the HoME series, there is a small blurb in HoME v.10 which discusses Saruman's mixing of the races of Orcs and Men. Here is the last bit:Finally, there is a cogent point though horrible to relate. It became clear in time that undoubted Men could under the domination of Morgoth or his agents in a few generations be reduced almost to the Orc-level of mind and habits; and then they would or could be made to mate with Orcs, producing new breeds, often larger and more cunning. There is no doubt that long afterwards, in the Third Age, Saruman rediscovered this, or learned of it in lore, and in his lust for mastery committed this, his wickedest deed: interbreeding of Orcs and Men, producing both Men-orcs large and cunning, and Orc-men treacherous and vile.Notice that this deed is described as wicked, and that the mannish offspring are vile (presumably the orcish offspring are already acknowledged to be vile, being orcs after all). This is a horrible point to relate, and it was Saruman's lust for mastery which led to the event. IMO Tolkien's language is expressing his absolute revulsion at the whole concept- he isn't pulling any linguistic punches. Strong language is of course the way to express the concept in a book, the analogous representation on screen is to show that the breeding is repulsive. If Tolkien used such strong language, then I think PJ has every right to use a graphic visualization- in fact it's staying true to the books, something which PJ is often criticized for not doing.

[Kavrangoz]

I understand you Gandalf the white.You should watch the film
"From dusk till dawn"It's a vampire film.But there are some creatures in the film.Watch it and say:Peter Jackson's orcs are the vampires in that film.You can not expect Peter Jackson to CREATE.He can not create because he can not understand what he reads.I wish that he didn't make that job.But he did.Some people can sell their honour.

Money,money,money.Money made Peter Jackson a honourless man

But i think that i'm very lucky.Because i grew up with John Howe not with

DISHONOURABLE Peter Jackson

!!!!Gandalf the white please e-mail me because this is the subject ý want to discuss and i think that we think similar.
Kavrangoz@Yahoo.com

[Talimon]

But i think that i'm very lucky.Because i grew up with John Howe not with

DISHONOURABLE Peter Jackson

Sorry to break your heart but John Howe (and Alan Lee) did the majority of the principal art design for the movies. As such, the overall look of the movies is single-handedly influenced by them. You seem to have a very passionate hate towards PJ, though I don't find your arguments to be very convincing. Certainly the orcs weren't so unoriginal (if unoriginal at all) that they hurt the movie as a whole? Then again, perhaps some people would say that what's important about LotR is that the orcs look original...

[Arvedui]

I actually expected the orcs to have rather similar looks. Instead, I was watching orcs that were as different from eachother as people in any crowd in the world. Still, in my opinion they fitted perfectly in the movie. Luckilly I have not seen any of PJ's other movies. According to some, they must be pretty bad.
Yes, he may have gotten a little carried away. But no, it did not degrade the movie. They really come out as BAAAAAD...uhm....orcs!?!

[Sam_Gamgee]

orcs are disgusting creatures. fallen and tortured elves. (like angels (elves) and demons (orcs) )

[fersganjh]

orcs r elves, succumbed 2 the will of sauron (or sum other evil force...) in the LOTR, every Elf u met (Elrond, Legolas, Arwen, Galadriel, Elladan, Elrohir, etc.) had his/her own looks, personality, etc. i don't c y it should have been different w/ the orcs. if PJ did make the orcs all alike in look & fashion, then it wud have cheapened the movie (& that wud have killed it)

[Diamond Took]

Am i the only 1 here who thinx Lurtz is hott?

and the orcs weren't discusting. they were sexy 'specially lurtz. o and i liked grishnak too. yummy.

[HLGStrider]

Elgee throws a bucket of water on Diamond... Yuck...

[Legolas_lover12]

LL12 quickly turns her head to avoid throwing up on her comp ...

[CloakedShadow]

Yes the orcs are foul and mutilated creatures, the once beautiful elves turned disgusting...but they weren't morons. They had their own language and were somewhat intelligent. They were total freakish beings, all slimy or anything. But that's just how I pictured them when I read the books.

[Talimon]

Originally posted by CloakedShadow
Yes the orcs are foul and mutilated creatures, the once beautiful elves turned disgusting...but they weren't morons. They had their own language and were somewhat intelligent. They were total freakish beings, all slimy or anything. But that's just how I pictured them when I read the books.

Are you saying they were portrayed accurately or inaccruately in the movie?

[CloakedShadow]

Hmm, I guess I forgot to answer the initial question! :rolleyes: Oops...my bad...hehehe. Well, I think they were portrayed a bit inaccurately, but it wasn't an extreme change. My picture was a little less goopy-slimy, and a bit taller, like an inch or so. And I didn't really see them as they hissing sort...

[Diamond Took]

Orcs are an intelligent good looking race IMO. so there. and no body can make me change my mind!!!:p ;) :D

[Talimon]

Intelligent? Good looking? Are we forgetting exactly what they represented in Tolkiens tale? They were meant to be the foulest of the foul, the most demented and tortured creatures in Middle Earth. Need I quote Tolkiens many references to orcs being vile and dumb, or can I trust that others memory will serve them right? If you have anything to complain about regarding the orcs it should be Lurtz. That is more discussable.

[Diamond Took]

Well I thought they were an intelligent and good-looking race. probably because i'm actually a Yrch in elven disguise. ;)

[Ravenna]

I wasn't too bothered by the appearance of the orcs, although I had alway pictured them as more goblinlike and less manlike.
The only bit that I thought was a bit OTT was the birthing out of slime scene, I just didn't really get where it came from as I understood that life can only be created by Illuvatar, and that the orces were corrupted beings, bred by Sauron and Saruman, not constructs.

[joxy]

Originally posted by Ravenna
The only bit that I thought was a bit OTT was the birthing out of slime scene, I just didn't really get where it came from

That is quite one of the silliest new scenes in the film. As to where it came from, the answer is, presumably, PJ's imagination- and if so, then I guess a psychologist or psychiatrist would have a great time finding out how it got there!

[CloakedShadow]

Lol, Diamond Took...

But listen, sure they were grossly vile and quite dumb, but they weren't flaming morons! They had their own language, which shows a feeble sign of intelligence...if nothing more.

[Legolas_lover12]

well, i always thought of them as pretty stupid ...

[Diamond Took]

Originally posted by joxy


That is quite one of the silliest new scenes in the film. As to where it came from, the answer is, presumably, PJ's imagination- and if so, then I guess a psychologist or psychiatrist would have a great time finding out how it got there!

well, we all have our own perceptions of the book. perhaps that is how Jackson percieved it, and i guess he was lucky enough to be given the neccesities to put his perception of the book into film. :D

[Diamond Took]

Originally posted by Ravenna

The only bit that I thought was a bit OTT was the birthing out of slime scene

i actually liked that scene where Lurtz was sort of protruding from his slimy sack and it swelled, and suddenly burst. yummy. :)

[Legolas_lover12]

ok then. D.T. i think you might need a lot of serious therapy;):rolleyes::D:):p

[joxy]

Originally posted by Diamond Took
....perhaps that is how Jackson percieved it, and i guess he was lucky enough to be given the neccesities to put his perception of the book into film.
Exactly, he perceived it that way, and as someone else agrees, if that's how he perceives things then a psychiatrist would be fascinated and intrigued by his perception- and would probably suggest some therapy for it!
It can't be his perception of the BOOK- that scene had nothing to do with the book.
So he was lucky by being given those necessities- what about the unlucky viewer who has to watch the result?

[Angbor]

I agree with joxy, of couse there were so many things in the movie that had nothing to do with the book. One of the most stupid scenes
was the fight between Gandalf and Saruman, or was it the council of Elrond when they all started arguing with each other, or was it... Oh there are to many silly scenes to mention here. I think I'll just read the books again to help drive the movie from my memory.

[joxy]

Originally posted by Angbor
One of the most stupid scenes....was the fight between Gandalf and Saruman, or.... or was it....Oh there are to many silly scenes to mention here.
I've had to use the words "silly" and "stupid" about many scenes- starting from the very first, through the fireworks-in-tent and broken carrot, via wizard fight, to body-down-well, among others!

[Talimon]

joxy, I remember you saying you thought 95% of the movie was well done. I don't know by what standard or scale you measure your enjoyment, but it would seem to me as if there is some gap in your reasoning if you enjoy 95% of the movie and still find it suitable to criticize 80% of it.

[HLGStrider]

You can critisize just for the heck of it... I know I do sometimes. Anyway, I'd like to see you work out that statistic...

[joxy]

Originally posted by Talimon
joxy, I remember you saying you thought 95% of the movie was well done. I don't know by what standard or scale you measure your enjoyment, but it would seem to me as if there is some gap in your reasoning if you enjoy 95% of the movie and still find it suitable to criticize 80% of it.
I haven't been through it with a stopwatch yet, but I don't think the scenes I just mentioned add up to all that much time, certainly not to 20%. And anyway, like you, I "enjoy" almost all of it, as a film, but still wish it was an even better film, by pandering less to PJ's odd imagination.

[HLGStrider]

Joxy, I DEMAND you go through the movie with a stop watch then calculate every part you have ever critisized and then bring the statistic back to us to scrutinize...

So there... :D ;)

[joxy]

Originally posted by HLGStrider
Joxy, I DEMAND you go through the movie with a stop watch then calculate every part you have ever critisized and then bring the statistic back to us to scrutinize....
Lol, Well I did say I hadn't been through it with a stopwatch YET!
And thanks for that great quotation from Aragorn; if only that scriptwriter had taken that, and so many more like it, as his example!

[Talimon]

Originally posted by joxy

Lol, Well I did say I hadn't been through it with a stopwatch YET!
And thanks for that great quotation from Aragorn; if only that scriptwriter had taken that, and so many more like it, as his example!

That quote is from TTT, by the way. :)

[joxy]

Originally posted by Talimon
That quote is from TTT, by the way.
Yes I know, and I hope that in December I find that the scriptwriters have ALL been influenced by reading the whole book thoroughly, for style as well as substance! Of course, I also hope they didn't have much to do, in the area of invention:-)

[HLGStrider]

That quote gives me the shivvvvvvvvvvvvers.... burrrrr

[Diamond Took]

Originally posted by joxy

Exactly, he perceived it that way, and as someone else agrees, if that's how he perceives things then a psychiatrist would be fascinated and intrigued by his perception- and would probably suggest some therapy for it!
It can't be his perception of the BOOK- that scene had nothing to do with the book.
So he was lucky by being given those necessities- what about the unlucky viewer who has to watch the result?


ever heard of fan fiction? :p
seriously, my fanfic of diamond took is pretty disturbing... even more so than PJ's. :) and i'm just a normal person... i think... :p :rolleyes:

[joxy]

Originally posted by Diamond Took
ever heard of fan fiction?

NO

[Ariana Undomiel]

It is true that mankind can interpret things many many different ways. PJ obviously took the creation of the foul orcs to be just as disgusting as the results. Thus appears the revolting scene with the spawning. I believe that Tolkien could have easily written it to be that way, but he simply left that part to the imaginations of his readers. He never really got into details about how the orcs were created and born. Tolkien never wrote things to be quite that disgusting. We have to remember that PJ's speciality is horror films and so naturally some of that will occur in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. It is rather unfortunate in my opinion, but it is never the less true. I don't believe that PJ needs pyscological therapy, but perhaps he should have considered a little more deeply the kind of stuff that Tolkien would or wouldn't have approved of in a film made from his masterpiece. Of course, Tolkien wouldn't have like it one way or the other because he HATED films and television.

~Ariana

[Talimon]

If FotR proves anything it's that PJ's speciality is in film-making, not merely horror-movies. I personally thought that both 'Heavenly Creatures' and 'Forgotten Silver' proved that, but FotR seals it. PJ's LotR is slowly but surely surpassing Star Wars as the pinacle of cinematic fandom and escapism. From a directorial point of view, FotR is an incredible movie, in my opinion easily surpassing any fantasy movie ever made. If PJ goes on to make 'The Hobbit' I think we can safely say that he is as much a Fantasy director as a Horror one. And personally I consider his supposedly "horror" movies to be more in the cult realm then any pre-defined genre. But that's just me.

[joxy]

Originally posted by Talimon
PJ's LotR is slowly but surely surpassing Star Wars as the pinacle of cinematic fandom and escapism....From a directorial point of view, FotR is an incredible movie
"fandom"- did you mean to use the word, and if so what does it mean?
Star Wars is to FOTR as apples are to pears.
This use of "incredible" to mean very good is really confusing!
Incredibly good, incredibly bad, unbelieveable, impossible to be believed....

[Talimon]

I guess that would be another one of our "cultural differences" joxy. While I've heard "incredible" used negatively, generally speaking I associate it as being positive. For example, if I hear someone say, "This movie is incredible!" it usually means they thought it was a very good movie . It depends on the context. It's like saying "That movie was unbelieveable!". I don't literally mean I didn't believe it, it means I can't believe how good it was. At least from my experience if it's going to have negative connotations then you'd add the "unbelieveably bad" or "incredibly bad". Otherwise it's assumed it's positive, at least as far as I'm concerned. I also use it sometimes in terms of size or scope, as in "That building was incredibly large". Get Thorin in here, I think he's an English teacher. :)

Yes, I meant to use the word "fandom". It's just the fanatic culture that surrounds something. Star Wars arguably started the whole fandom culture, or at the very least brought it to the masses. I don't think movies ever had that kind of following before. What I was saying was that PJ's LotR, both in popular/cultural impact, and arguably in quality, equals and perhaps even surpasses Star Wars.

[Ariana Undomiel]

Hmmmm ... I figured that the orcs had an intelligance to a certain extent, but they were really selfish, blood thirsty, disgusting creatures so I kind of forget that they are intelligent to a certain extent.

~Ariana

[Mrs. Maggott]

Jackson wasn't too bad with the orcs although in the book, I was more inclined to view them having darker, almost reptilian skin. In the Chamber of Marzabul, Frodo stabs one in the foot which is described as dark, flat and toeless.

Naturally, being sentient, they were all different from one another not only in appearance (although different groups had similar traits that set them apart such as the smaller, darker "tracker" orcs), but in mental ability as well. They were certainly NOT stupid as were the trolls but some were definitely brighter than others.

The real failing of the orcs was a total lack of self control; they fought literally to the death with each other at the drop of a hat even to the detriment of survival. They were without loyalty either to their race or their individual "tribe" or even their close associates. Remember the fellow that the orcs of Cirith Ungol left in Shelob's web even though he was alive? They could have rescued him, but his life was unimportant to them. They are totally without decency and absolutely untrustworthy - which is why they do not participate in Sauron's "inner circle". To him, they are useful slaves, but really nothing more than "cannon fodder". However, obviously their "life force" is bound up with his because at his fall they run around mindless wishing only to hide from destruction. Orcs definitely have a "hive" mentality which is a sign of something lower on the evolutionary scale.

However, I found that Jackson had a certain respect for his orcs (he took a lot of time with them not only in the planning phase but in the film itself) which I wish had carried over to some of his other characters. The more I think about the movie as I saw (and read about) it, the more I can't help but feel that Jackson, did not have very much respect for Aragorn at least in FOTR. Perhaps that changes in the other films, but there was so much in the first that illustrates his state of mind regarding this character.

Bree and its immediate aftermath were fine. But the business with Arwen (the "sneaking up" bit followed by Aragorn's instant acquiescence to her taking on the Nazgul and carrying off the Bearer) did not show me a courageous and able man, but rather an inept fellow who was so unsure of himself that he allowed the woman he loved to dictate to him what should be done in a moment of absolute crisis and which resulted in her placing herself (and the quest) in "mortal" danger. I cannot imagine that anyone gained either confidence in or respect for the character in that particular scene. I didn't and Aragorn is my favorite character in the book!

My suspicions were further justified by the whole treatment of Aragorn in Rivendell. He sits in that darkened room, reading, while Boromir, the man of action, picks up the shards of Narsil - not with deep respect, but almost insolently. What does Aragorn do? Nothing. What does he say? Nothing. It requires the sword itself to put a check on the mighty Boromir by cutting his finger.

Then, when Gandalf speaks to Elrond about the possiblity of the the line of Elendil returning, Elrond replies with a look of barely concealed contempt, that "he" (he does not even name the man!) has abandoned his birthright and "chosen another way". What way? And how can that be when we know that Aragorn and Arwen's marriage depends upon his being King of both kingdoms? If he has truly abandoned his birthright, then his whole relationship with her is a farce and Jackson knows it!

When the two lovers meet on the bridge, it is Arwen, NOT Aragorn who is "in charge"; you can feel it. He prevaricates and attempts rather helplessly to talk her out of her feelings for him. In the book, it is Aragorn who approaches Elrond for Arwen's hand, not the other way around! On teh bridge, she, not he, is strong, sure and absolute in her determination to continue their "relationship" (whatever the heck that consists of!). Which of these two is the more "manly"?

Finally, in the Council, Jackson - speaking through Boromir - states that Gondor doesn't need a King; Gondor doesn't WANT a King. Hellloooo.... Where in the world does Tolkien EVER say that? True, Boromir is less than sanguine about the man he sees before him (to which Aragorn replies that he is only Isildur's descendent, not Isildur himself), but Boromir NEVER renounces a legitimate king in Gondor, never.

Please remember, that however good Aragorn is with a sword or a bow in battle, this is NOT the same thing as being a great leader. Jackson did not make him inept or a coward (except in that bit with Arwen and the Nazgul), but he certainly does not present us in his treatment of Aragron in FOTR with a believable leader, much less a believable King.

I don't know why Jackson has such little respect for what is the leading "man" in his story. Perhaps he felt that Tolkien's Aragorn was "too perfect" - he certainly kicks him around in the battle scenes whereas Tolkien says that his skills are so great that he isn't even knicked, much less wounded! I don't know. Perhaps Jackson felt that it was better film making to have his charcter "grow" from a weak, uncertain slacker in the first film to a real King in the third. But that's not Tolkien's character. Aragorn NEVER forsook his birthright or his heritage. He did not "abandon" the Ring Bearer (as it appeared at the end of FOTR) because he feared that he would succumb to the lure of the Ring (he had already proven himself beyond that!). He kept his identity hidden because had he not, Sauron would have launched instantaneous bloody war to kill or capture the heir of hated Elendil. But whenever necessary - in Rohan, on the Paths of the Dead etc. - he declared himself without any hesitancy.

Frankly, for whatever reason, it seemed to me that Jackson seemed far fonder of the orcs than he did of many who were on the other side of the struggle. God knows why! :confused:

[Talimon]

I responded to the Aragorn issue in another thread. Try and keep things on subject. If you want to go off-track start a new thread, and we can discuss this there. I certainly think you have completely misinterpreted both the movie and the book, however. But we can discuss that elsewhere.

[Mrs. Maggott]

I sincerely hope that you find this comment "on thread"!

I have just learned from a TTT changes site that indeed the duel between Eowyn and Aragorn does in fact take place and that she WINS! He doesn't draw a sword on her, but instead fights with a long knife - big fat hairy deal. COME ON! ENUFF of this artistic license, it's a great movie no matter what! Meadowmuffins!! :mad:

This isn't just a change in plot or an increase in character involvement - this is taking a character and TRASHING him! First, you have him draw against an opponent he KNOWS is a woman AND the beloved niece of your host, the KING of Rohan. Then you have him LOSE, for heaven's sake! :mad:

What on earth more does Mr. Jackson have to do to make even his strongest supporters begin to consider that he may have gone just a leetle too far.....? Perhaps when he has Arwen carry Frodo to the Fire as she did to the ford and Eowyn beat Sauron in hand-to-hand combat, there just might be a little more sympathy for us unfortunate "purists"!
:mad:

[Mrs. Maggott]

My apologies! When I read the thread coming back to it after so long, I didn't see "the orcs" part - only the "carried away". I will repost this in a more appropriate thread. Again, sorry, but I was carried away! :mad:

[HLGStrider]

Elgee bangs her head against key board fxx... Disappointing... bang your head against the key board and all you get is fxx? I was hoping for a general ahofhads;lkfjasdjfasdoi;fjsadjdijf;adsl.

What's the point of being HLGStrider if that is Strider? I'll have to change my name! I wonder what to... HLGBeren... HLGReallycutekitten... HLGMeow... HLGWriter... HLGElgee... brother and bother.