posted
I read something about this on Ain't it cool news. Harry had spoken with Peter Jackson and gave a bit of deatail about the whole situation. If I can find where exactly i read this I'll post back
Posts: 1294 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
I have no idea how authoritative the source is, but the explanation seems to make sense.
But if Christopher Lee is saying those 7 minutes would have been his only appearance in ROTK, I'm a little sad...I would have liked to see our now-tough hobbit heroes kick "Sharky's" fanny when they all return to the Shire at the end. I guess maybe that's too anticlimactic an ending for the movie, but I love it in the book.
Posts: 24 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's really, really sad. Christopher Lee is great and the wrap up in the Shire with Sharky and Wormtongue is one of the best endings ever.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
DVD is great, isn't it! I can understand their reasoning for the cut but am glad it will reappear in the extended version DVD. I have run into one person who does not like the extended DVDs. I just don't understand why.
Posts: 134 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm also disappointed The Scouring of the Shire was not filmed. To me it more personalized the whole thing for the Hobbitts, in that the battle even reaches the Shire.
Posts: 134 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
About three years ago, when we learned that they weren't going to film the last half of Return of the King, a number of us contemplated burning down the set with torches....
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally, I think that if they weren't going to include the Scouring of the Shire then they shouldn't have spent so much time in the Shire in FotR. (Which is really just my way of saying that they should have included both.)
Posts: 4534 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I bet the bit that is getting left out is the dialouge between Gandalf and Saruman where Wormtounge throws the seeing stone out the window. I've been wondering if they were going to explore the plot of Pippin and Merry being decoys, Merry using the stone so Sauron sees him and then thinks Merry is the one with the ring and then Aragorn taking the stone and wrestling with Sauron before taking the Paths of the Dead.
At least we know the Paths of the dead will be there.
posted
Believe it or not I know one person who walked out of the first LotR movie because he thought it was boring. (He hadn't read the books but I don't know if that really makes a difference.) And Steve's family (who sometimes wonder if Steve is an alien from another planet sent to their family) didn't particularly like it either though they were polite about it when we watched it last Christmas.
posted
I found it wonderful that Chris Lee was a fan, who, after all these years, actually got to be involved with the definitive film version of the work.
As for his "cut scenes"...
I'm sure we will see them in the extended version of the movie, if not the theatrical release. (The Two Towers extended version will be out soon! I have been waiting since last year!)
Posts: 2506 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I may be blind to all the facts, but I still believe (hope) that there will be a shire scene at the end, very similar to the book. I just cant imagine the story without that... I think we're being misled or something.
Posts: 879 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course in FotR they did leave a lot of what happened in the Shire out.
I also don't think their leaving half of RotK out.? The Scouring of the Shire doesn't make up but a small portion at the end of RotK.
Posts: 134 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Lee said appearing in the first two Lord of the Rings movie had been "a dream come true".
Poor Christopher Lee, that's got to smart. He was on a Britsh chat show last week talking about how excited he was about seeing ROTK for the first time as he hadn't had a chance see his part in it while they were making it. I don't think he knew, he seemed really happy. Poor guy.
Posts: 119 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Unless they are all hiding something the Scouring of the Shire is out. That is what fuled rumors of Saruman's death at the end of TTT. It made sense, if there is no Scouring then Saruman can die at the end of TTT. There might be some type of Shire scene but it will not be the Scouring from the books. Supposedly there will be an epilouge done by Galadriel, similar to the prolouge(SP) from the first movie, so that Galadriel telling the history of the ring will bookend the start and the finish of the movie.
quote:Of course in FotR they did leave a lot of what happened in the Shire out.
Attempting to cover a story of that magnitude in a movie (even a 3-4 hour movie) means that you have to cut a lot. So they obviously had to leave a lot out. However, they spent quite a lot of screen time in the Shire, and Jackson has said that he purposely did that because he wanted people to feel the difference between the hobbits' lives in the Shire and on the quest. That reasoning can just as easily be applied to including the ending scenes in the Shire.
AJ, I wasn't bored by FotR, but it did and does make me angry. I have always felt that Jackson's interpretation of the world was flawless and his interpretation of the story was awful.
(*** mild spoiler if you haven't read the books ***) I tell you, if the third movie doesn't end at the Grey Havens I am going to scream.
posted
The scouring is definitely not in. Here's a picture of them shooting the way Saruman dies (which we probably won't see) which seems to have nothing to do with the scouring or Sharky. ***spoiler*** (but if they cut it, it's a spoiler for the DVD I guess. )
posted
Oh help That's the best death scene since the one envisioned by William Shatner for Spock on the Wrath of Khan DVD.
Okay, I have no pity for Saruman because he was in the first two films way, way, WAY more than the books have him. I know it was necessary for exposition yadda yadda, but these sour grapes suggest that maybe he didn't read the book, or like the character Saruman he got a swelled head about his importance in the scheme of things. However, I've only read through the middle of TTT so maybe I am the one underestimating Saruman's importance in ROTK.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:That's the best death scene since the one envisioned by William Shatner for Spock on the Wrath of Khan DVD.
That sounds interesting, but I know nothing about it. What death scene did Shatner envision for Spock?
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
"However, I've only read through the middle of TTT so maybe I am the one underestimating Saruman's importance in ROTK."
Yes. You are. In the novel, Saruman is essential to the "Scouring of the Shire" section -- which a lot of us fans believe is the whole POINT of the trilogy, and which we're sorry to see go. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
What was funny about William Shatner's concept for the death of Spock was that the wall between them would have been white with a shadown on it rather than clear. So the scene would mainly feature Captain Kirk.
It's not analogous in any way, it just popped into my head as "egocentric actor".
If the scouring of the Shire is so pivotal, it sounds like ya'll are going to have to skip the movie, eh?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey, I'm sure we can expect to see Saruman in the LOTR ABC Christmas Special and Hobbits: The Battle for Middle Earth in the near future.
Posts: 4753 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"If the scouring of the Shire is so pivotal, it sounds like ya'll are going to have to skip the movie, eh?"
No. It just means that the story the movie tells -- of a hero's rise to power, and the wars and tribulations he and his allies suffered on their way there -- is not the same story the book tells.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think The scouring is pivotal to the story, but it is a nice contrast, showing how the four hobbits have grown during the book, and how loss has affected Frodo. I can understand why it was left out, but I don't have to like it. I am still eagerly awaiting the ROTK and think that overall, PJ has done a wonderful job on the movies.
quote:No. It just means that the story the movie tells -- of a hero's rise to power, and the wars and tribulations he and his allies suffered on their way there -- is not the same story the book tells.
That's not true. It's just not the same interpretation of the book that YOU took. (And I'd also interpret the movie differently than you - it's about the ring and the concept of power much more than any given hero or character.)
The truth is, at this point, the Scouring would be totally out of place in these films. The hobbits' growth as characters has recieved very little focus up to this point. If the Scouring was added at this point it would feel much more like an add-on to appease the fans than a plot piece that necessarily follows from everything else that happened.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
"It's just not the same interpretation of the book that YOU took."
Well, yes. But it would be absurdly foolish of me to say something like, "This is my interpretation of the book, but I'm clearly wrong about that. Even though I'm supremely confident that this is what the book is about, at its very heart, based on Tolkien's own statements and what I saw as the emotional center of the novels, it really IS a war story that throws in some puerile bits about the temptation of power."
You're perfectly entitled to believe that the book means something else, but I believe you're wrong about that.
On the other hand, it's clearly easier to base a movie on the lesser themes of the book; these themes are much easier to film, and much more "interesting" to the typical audience. They also provide a framework to throw in as much of other themes as you can, by shoehorning in as much as you can when it doesn't interfere with the rest of your plot (as, I think, they've done with the whole "temptation of power" bit.)
Don't get me wrong: I think the films are almost the best possible films you can make of the trilogy. I just don't think they're about the same thing the trilogy is about.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Hey, I'm sure we can expect to see Saruman in the LOTR ABC Christmas Special and Hobbits: The Battle for Middle Earth in the near future.
I like the sound of that. Now, if we can only get Bea Arthur and Jefferson Starship to do musical numbers for the holiday special, we'll be set.
Posts: 651 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, wait... If Saruman's not in the movie at ALL, then how do we get the Palantir into the mix?
Posts: 2258 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
why.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
***spoiler*** (but if they cut it, it's a spoiler for the DVD I guess. ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
)![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
Oh help 
