Return of the King Book and Movie.

Remove all ads!

I am nearly finished the Return of the King, book 3 of Lord of the Rings. This is the fourth time to read it. As I have only 3 chapters to go and Frodo has achieved his quest and everyone is off home, my mind started to wander...(as it tends to...)

I wondered what would the movie version by Peter Jackson (go Kiwis!) due later this year have as the ending. I reckon it will be with either Frodo losing his finger or with the Marriage of Aragorn to Arwen.

Clearly the movie version will need to be different, but I can't see the story going on to the point where Frodo leaves to Valinor. That's my prediction. (I don't care if I am surprised by Jackson, in fact it's probably better!)

What is your prediction for the ending?

 

I've heard that Frodo goes back to hobbiton, but this is much shorter than in the book, and even leaves to Valinor before the movie finishes.

And i'm slightly (no not slightly, really) surprised hearing an aussie say go kiwis .

 

Don't expect that comment from me . I would think that it will end with Sam thinking of Mr. Frodo. Right to the end. It ties up rather well, but it will miss out on the appendicies. I can guarentee it. Oh well, it should be fun.

 

Actually, I finished reading the book last night and I thought that it would be possible that the story may go on, but movie wise I am not sure. Jackson did need to change some bits here and there. Let's wait in quivering slightly salivating expectation...

 

I can promise you all that the movie will atleast go back to hobbiton, I have seen clips of the movie and even seen some of the sences for when the battle of hobbiton takes place.

 

I can't see any reason whatsoever why the movie shouldn't track the book in terms of ending.

It's a fine ending.

"I'm home"

 

The beginning and ending of LotR are clearly alot weaker than the other parts of the series. The story ends atop Mount Doom, that dragging the ending out like Tolkien does has no point really. He could and should have summed it up with a short epilogue of a few pages.

If what you say is true and that they will go back to Hobbiton and bla bla bla I am disapointed in Jackson. He had the guts to cut out most of the incredible boring first 100 pages of the first book and I think he should have the guts to cut out most of the completely unescessary dragged out ending of the series.

 

I heard, though from only a semi reliable source, that Peter Jackson (and the other people who chose what to cut and stuff) said (paraphrasin here)

"Well the return to hobbiton was one of our favourite scenes, but due to time constraints we had to cut it". In short, although Frodo will return to hobbiton, the 'sharky' part is cut. I'm guessing that the sailing off to Valinor part will still be in though.

This is all from a friend/s who were reading various interviews. If someone could validate whether or not the 'sharky' part is cut or not i would be grateful.

 

Probably a stupid tearjerker with Aragorn dieing and Arwen crying herself to death.


Grr.

Arwen die.

(Wolvie, yes you can kill Arwen. But not now. We don't want PJ suing us, don't we?)

 

We can expect a different ending. The Two Towers ending in the movie was before it ended in Book II, probably to extend the action because the main conflict ends early in Book III.

 

The reason the 2nd movie ended before the book did (in my opinon that is) is because the 3rd book is much shorter than the rest of the books (not including the appendix) so they needed more things to put in the third movie.
Saruman on the spike?... yes i can remember seeing that in the paper. I have no idea what that is about but as i said before i swear that they will return back to hobbiton but not for as long as they did in the book.

 

I think that it'll go the whole way. The ending of Return of the King was brilliant. Marriage will come first of course.

 

I don't want to see a movie *based* on LotR. I want to see "The Return of the King" and not a different version of it. However, I liked "The Two Towers" but only as a movie. I didn't like it as a LotR movie for that reason: almost everything was changed. I think that PJ should stick to the book.

 

I sort of expected that Jackson would deviate from the book. The extended DVD version of Fellowship is extremely interesting in that they all explain how they put the film together (and you get the extra juicy pieces. I've even forgotten what was not in the extended version now!) and the reasoning behind why certain sections were left out or changed. Most of these were for those people who go to see the film without having read the book, and there are a lot of people in this category. They like the film as it is and don't really need the book to back it up or explain it.

I really like the films so far eventhough they are "heterodox".

Ruler. Do you have any links to sites that may give some other clues?

 

No, sorry i don't at the moment, I've never been one for searching on the web, but i'll try to find something.

(After spending about 20 minutes looking) Sorry i couldn't find a thing. Although if i remember right the news paper article (which came out 2000 if you want to try finding it your self) didn't say anything about that sence. Apart from that there are some new 'chapters' appearing in the LotR movies.

[ May 16, 2003, 11:55: Message edited by: Ruler of the Known Universe ]

 

I have been watching the commentaries on the Extended Fellowship DVD. Peter Jackson explains that what you see in the Mirror of Galadriel is the Scouring of the Shire. That is all that will be in this movie trilogy. No scouring as he put it.

 

I think the first movie was a really good film, doing a great tribute to the book. The second film, in my opinion, sucked (that Viggo just can't act). if the third film can pull off the same quality as the first, I'll be happy.

 

http://www.infoceptor.com/ibb/index.php?act=ST&f=7&t=5564&s=