You have some interesting ideas, but I think you are falling into the trap of listing differences between the books and the films which I very clearly stated that I did not want you to do.
This is supposed to be an essay based on Shippey’s article! Please read the general comments on the rough drafts which I posted on the “(Almost) Daily Bulletin from the Professor” page yesterday. Lydia Fish September 23, 2008, at 10:00 AM
I like all of the ideas that you bring up. This sounds like it will turn out to be a well-developed essay. Sarah Chudyk?
I like your views on Gollum, and the needed empathy the viewers had to have for him to be an effective character. I also agree with your views on the Shire, and how Saruman’s death was changed, even more so with how you brought in how the Hobbit’s beliefs were ultimately proved false. Devon Cozad? September 17, 2008, at 12:28 PM
How Jackson stays true to the characters and how he must make compromises is a good place to focus in your paper. The mentioning of Arwen ties into Shippey and you could work that to your benifit. Solid outline. Sarah McNutt? September 17, 2008, at 12:50 PM
I think including how Saruman dies in the movie is important to include in your paper. You could even tie that in with how to represent the villians in the movie, since Sauron is a giant flaming eye, and the importance of the King of the Nazguls and the Mouth of Sauron, once Saruman is no longer a threat. Annika Laughlin? September 16, 2008, at 09:56 PM
There are quite a few papers relating to the scouring of the shire. Not only did you suggest that it’s a crucial point to show the maturity of the hobbits, but you also discussed other crucial elements from that part of ROTK. Since you have alot of expansion on the shire, could you include what you might particularly do to the film? I know the paper is mainly supposed to be about Jackson’s difficulties, but would the film be better off taking out/shortening the other scenes, and putting in one long scouring the shire scene? Could it be possible with the time limit and budget? Lauren Brych? September 16, 2008, at 12:56 PM
I have read several papers on how Jackson omitted the scouring of the Shire. I liked how you included Jackson’s solution to this omission (moving sarumans death to orthanc) I would also like to read more on how Jackson dealt with some of the difficulties you mentioned, like the connection between Aragorn and Arwen. You made some good points and have a strong base to build on. Carly Lopez?
You defintely seem to have a solid opinion of what the movie should have been like. But you might want to explore both ends of the issue. Offer up a reason why, for instance, the Scouring of the Shire wasn’t included. I’m also pleased you’re going to investigate the different paths that Anduril takes in the books, and the films. I’m very intrigued by that facet of the story. If you stay focused on it’s placement in Return of the King…it should provide a good reason for the change.Joseph Bella? September 14, 2008, at 04:18 PM
I think you have great ideas in the Scouring of the Shire paragraph, however, you should write about some reasons why Jackson didnt add this scene. I like your idea of Jackson not using flashbacks, you should expand on this idea more for your final essay. Maybe go into detail about why flashbacks would have been a bad idea. If you expand on some of your other points at the bottom of your draft you will have a nice essay. Elizabeth Delano? September 14, 2008, at 12:05 AM
I think you should include the reason why Jackson couldn’t use the Scouring of the Shire in the film. I like how you discussed both successes and failures Jackson had.Emily Marvin? September 13, 2008, at 11:34 PM
I like some of your points about the Scouring of the Shire- I definitely think that this should have been included in the film. I also thought that your idea about Sam is true, and the changing of characters introduced in the earlier movies. I think that you should expand more on the timeline issue, and how the sequence of events was actually better suited to the ordering of scenes that Jackson decided on. Good job! Kelsey Till September 13, 2008, at 05:16 PM
You develope fully the reasons why Jackson chose the ending he did for the return of the King movie and how they are in line with Shippey’s predictions. Other than that you on great start since paper is mainly focused on the third book and movie. Great job.Trudy Antwi September 16, 2008, at 11:19 PM
Peter Jackson failed to include the Scouring of the Shire scene in his film which is crucial to the development and progression of the Shire and its hobbits. The Battle of Bywater is pivotal in displaying the leadership and combat abilities of Merry and Pippin. This also displays the honor and respect with which Merry and Pippin receive. This scene also demonstrates that the hobbit’s beliefs and world views must change. Previous to the scouring, hobbits generally believed that if they kept to themselves and minded their own business that no harm would come to them. This belief was obviously debunked by the arrival of Saruman and his reign of terror. Portrayed in the film was the hobbits returning to the Shire with ease and peace of mind when in the book the opposite actually occurred; the hobbits had to fight to retake their homeland which was by no means an easy feat. In the film there was peace after the destruction of the ring while in the book evil still lurked in Middle Earth. Also with the Scouring of the Shire scene, Frodo’s mercy for Saruman is displayed which could not be effectively portrayed within the film in any other scene.
Since Jackson did not include the Scouring of the Shire scene, he must have found it difficult to come up with a scene in which Saruman’s death occurs. Saruman’s death at Isengard was effectively executed and properly placed within the timeline of the film.
Peter Jackson ingeniously portrayed Gollum in a way that made the audience empathize with him. For viewers who had not read the books prior to watching the films, this portrayal of Gollum is crucial. Throughout the book one feels a sense of compassion and understanding for Gollum that is necessary for the film viewer to experience as well. It must have also been difficult for Jackson to build more of a main character for Gollum in the Return of the King amongst all of the other things he had and wanted to include into the film.
Peter Jackson was effectively able to overcome the overall disconnectedness of the books by allowing scenes to flow in a more natural timeline. Also, allowing major events to take place within the timeline as opposed to showing them as flashbacks or retellings allows for an overall improved presentation.
Peter Jackson’s decision on the final ending must have been a difficult one for him. Trying to remain loyal to the fans of the books and yet appeal to the large visual audience are, I’m sure, only some of the difficulties he must have experienced. Also, remaining loyal to Tolkien’s visions while trying to make a major motion film must have been challenging.
In the book Arwen and Aragorn are separated by a vast distance yet we still feel the connection between the two. Jackson must have found it challenging to introduce and display this connection between Aragorn and Arwen.
It is interesting how the forging of Anduril was placed in the Return of the King as opposed to the Fellowship of the Ring at the Council of Elrond. I would like to explore this further and consider why Jackson would place this event at a different time.
Peter Jackson was successfully able to portray Samwise Gamgee as the true hero of the film while not displaying him as the main character. Without Sam, Frodo would have never been able to complete his mission and the ring would have found its way back into the hand of Sauron.
Peter Jackson did well with bringing new excitement and interest to old characters (characters who were introduced in the Fellowship of the Ring). He effectively kept the audience interested in these characters while not disrupting the storyline.
Steven Wilser? September 14, 2008, at 12:21 PM
