RotK: a successful adaptation?

[azalea]

Here is the thread where you can voice your opinion of how well the movie succeeded as an adaptation of the book. Were you severely disappointed at the changes, or pleasantly surprised at how it was portrayed?
This thread is for debating the merits of the movie as a whole, using specifics to argue your points. If there is one part in particular about which you feel strongly, I encourage you to open a thread with that part/aspect as the subject, where it can be debated in detail and be given the attention it deserves, rather than be mixed in here. (Just be sure there hasn't already been a thread started on the same thing by doing a quick search of the forum. Thanks.)

P.S. I want to remind you to keep the discussion civil, refrain from personal attacks or comments, and will take this opportunity to refer you to the warning at the top of the forum. If anyone gets out of hand and forgets themselves (ie, if I have to warn you or edit your posts), I will not hesitate to bring it to the attention of the administrators. I thank you in advance for not letting things get down to that level.

P.P.S. Again, I'd like for the first person to post after me here to be someone who has already seen it and has an opinion to offer on the matter.

[Finrod Felagund]

"Well, I'm Back"
Yes, the Return of the King film ended the same as the book.

But I think I'll Start with the negative.
Other than the absent Scouring of the Shire and Saruman, there were othe changes, both small and big.
To begin, Denethor's nobility was greatly reduced. Making him seem a sick old man. And not sane from the beginning. Also, his Palantir goes unmentioned.
The Dead men make a greater impact here, instead of simply helping to take over the ships, the are the force that lifts the seige of Minas Tirith, rather than South Gondorians that Aragorn picked up.
Of course, the grey company is absent for the ride through the Paths of the Dead, and Elrond brings Anduril to Aragorn (though he should already have it.)
Sadly, Prince Imrahil, Beregond and other prominent Gondorian soldiers are absent as well as is Ghan-Buri-Gan and the wild men.
Of course, the other big change is Gollum poisoning Frodo towads Sam and Frodo sending Sam away. Though it does make Frodo look less helpless (he fights Shelob), the result is the same. Same brutally wounds Shelob and Frodo is captured.
The houses of healing are left for the EE, and Faramir/Eowyn only barely gets a nod (also reserved for the EE)
Many changes. Much evil...

Now for the Good.
The casting is of course (mostly) dead on.
The scenery and effects are bloody brilliant.
And the score is awesome.
The death of the witch king is spot on, absolutely amazing, despite the absence of the Barrow blade and a slight line change ("No man am I" to "I am no man") This scene was right out of the books.
The charge of the Rohirrim at the Seige of Minas Tirith was one of the most brilliant things I've ever seen. Absolutely stunning.
The city itself was also magnificent.
The arrival of the eagles at the Blackgate was also well done (I wasn't sure how this would play out but they did it well) and Gandalf's moth friend makes a cameo.
There is of course humour, but not all PJ's. J.R.R.'s humour is there, particularly in the scene where Gimli berates Merry & Pippin for sitting around smoking while they're out searching for them.
And, though not in the book, Gimli & Legolas continue their contest.
Shelob was frightening to say the least. And definitely not for arachnaphobes.
Aragorn and Pippin both sing. And Merry and Pippin get another drinking song at Rohan. (one about the Green Dragon)
And there is a beautiful moment where, on the mountain slope, Sam says "I may not be able to carry it for you...but I can carry you" and picks Frodo up. A real tearjerking moment.
Aragorn & Arwen share a passionate kiss (this is about the time when she was supposed to show up anyways)
The return to the Shiore was amusing (the grumpy old Hobbit gives the four princeling "the look"). And the four of them have a drink in the Green Dragon, where the "Concerning Hobbits" Shire theme from FotR makes a reprise. Frodo also mentions the morgul wound. "It's been exactly four years since weathertop".
Sam and Rosie's wedding is shown, and Pippin check out some hobbit chick.
The end was almost perfect, despite the fact that the Gamgees should have been living in Bag End, it was also right out of the book.

Well, that's all I have to say now, there's more but you'll have to wait till tomorrow (or tonight if you're doing the Marathon).
Well, enjoy, I'm seeing it again tomorrow at 3:45 in the afternoon.


P.S. Peter jackson's cameo for RotK is as the captain on a corsair ship near the beginning.



Cheers!
FF
Aaron

Well, I personally think that the films were sucessful in some respects but not others. I think the kept true to Tolkiens overall message (save the Scouring absence)

[Elenessiel]

As long as 'adaptation' is the key word in your query, yes, it was an excellent adaptation of the book. Peter Jackson took a LOT of creative liberties with this film. Even aside from the missing scouring of the Shire section, huge parts are left out (e.g. Saruman, Houses of Healing, Frodo and Sam's encounter with an orc army in Mordor, etc.). Pelenor Fields was actually pretty close to accurate. The rest, though, while not especially accurate, did a really smashing job of rewriting the story to make a very effective screenplay.
Oh, a note that probably belongs in the 'Review' section: I really missed Tolkein's emphasis on the weather. As in the dark clouds that shut out the sun for days on end and how the sun pierced through just as the heroes did something especially valiant.

[Finrod Felagund]

One thing I was really looking forward to was Gandalf confrontin the Witch King at the gate (i guess it'll be in the EE because I've seen a screenshot of it.)

I believe that Denethor was not particularly well written here, he was supposed to be a hopeless old man, but not insane until later.

[jellyfishannah]

Since I am extremely tired and am too busy dwelling on the bad stuff (have to get it over with some day, no? ) I will go ahead and say, This was a horrible adaptation. It was way too hurried. And Frodo Cliffhanger? Was that really necessary? As if what was in the book was not exciting enough? Disgusting. I knew it was going to happen though. I predicted it. It made me remember how much I truly loved TTT. Even with all it's faults. They were much smaller.
I think, PJ just tried to make it too big. I didn't have a problem so much with the Frodo/Sam/Gollum junk. (as I was forewarned) What really bothered me was how they had to make everything so much...bigger. It was stupid. Did anyone notice that the trolls seem to double in size with each movie?
There are a lot of things I loved, though. Which makes it so much worse. If this movie was a complete failure, then we would have room to do a remake. But no, this movie has way too many memorable moments and beautiful acting.(In fact, most of it is.)Not to mention amazing scenery and costumes and make up and all that junk. I better stop talking. I am giving myself a headache...

[Churl]

jellyfishannah wrote:

I will go ahead and say, This was a horrible adaptation.

That is, of course, your opinion, and as such I can’t say that you’re wrong to hold it.  I will say, however, that I strongly disagree.

The [literal] cliffhanger at the Cracks of Doom was at most a minor departure from the book.  Was it movie-ish and melodramatic?  Sure.  But imagining the much more grevious alterations that could have been made to the finale — in terms of both tone and plot — I thought that the spirit and events of the book were represented remarkably well.

As for the “big” scale of The Return of the King, again, I thought that that suited the book perfectly.  In fact, when I first heard that the films were being made, my first reaction was to doubt the possibility of making the finale as big (epic, sweeping, grandiose, apocalyptic, etc., etc.) as my imagination painted it.  I’m glad to say that my fears were groundless.

Even more important than the look of the film, however (and equally important as its plot), was its faithfulness to the characters as Tolkien wrote them.  In my opinion, only Denethor suffered major harm in the translation, but in fairness, I was pleased to see Faramir redeemed from his own book/movie alteration in The Two Towers.  (And Faramir’s portrayal in Towers was my foremost gripe with that film.)

As for omitted scenes, some were inevitable.  I agree with other reviewers who argued that more judicious editing could have preserved the confrontation with Saruman, but since this will appear in the Extended Edition DVD, I can get past it.  Like many others, I love the book’s “Houses of Healing” chapter — both for the gentle, beautiful romance that grows between Faramir and Eowyn, but also for its depiction of Aragorn as a healer as well as a warrior.  How much of this will be conveyed in EE footage remains to be seen.  Finally, the Scouring: yes, it’s a painful loss.  I see both sides to the argument, for and against its deletion, so for now I’ll say that its omission didn’t tarnish the film for me.

Overall — in terms of tone, plot, characterization, and visualization — I believe that Jackson and company got much, much more right than they got wrong.  (I say this about the entire trilogy as well as about The Return of the King specifically.)  Feel free to agree or disagree.

[jellyfishannah]

Do you guys always go through life saying "Well, it could've been worse"? Wow. You must be a jolly lot...

[Churl]

Well, I guess I’m just comparing my (dismal) predictions for these films with the actual results, and in nearly all areas, I was pleasantly surprised.

I certainly didn’t agree with all of the changes — the attempts to make Arwen present and relevant throughout the films seemed especially forced — but overall, exceptions aside, I loved how the films felt like the book (I’m sorry I can’t explain it any more clearly than that on short notice).

Again, what the book “felt like” to you, and consequently how well the films matched that feel, might be totally different from my impressions.  That’s the beauty of art, both written and filmed: we can both be right!

[Cirdan]

Well, as an adaptation it was good but not great; a better film overall than I expected.

First the Good:

The Battle of the Pellenor was very well adapted, even down to the details of the flow of the battle.

Minas Tirith was very nice visually.

Eowyn, Aragorn, Gandalf all protrayed very nicely.

Pippen and Merry are more true to the book this time around.

Arwen and Aragorn finally display some seemingly spontaneous passion for each other.

The signal tower sequence was very cool.

Slaying the Witch King. (though the lack of any magical explaination for Merry's stroke disabling him made it seem too easy). That mace was sweeeet!

The Grond.
_________________________________

The Bad:

The winding stair was almost a reverse angle. Some bizarre shots sleeping on the edge of the cliff.

Denethor eating

The wooden gate.

Aragorn's horse runs away from dwimorberg with Aduril's sheath.

Eowyn's appearance on the Pellenor not a surprise (why not?)

Gollum's solioquy that serves as a catch-up narrative. Seemed to purposed.

Gimli is still a comic foil but not in the degrading buffonish way of TTT. (no short jokes , no dwarf tossing.finally)

The Deagol/Smeagol bit actually worked very well.

Sam the Man.

Shelob

_____________________________________________

The Ugly:

Gandalf beating Denethor up. Not very dignified.

Denethor's flaming hundred yard dash and long jump.

Sam sent away by Fodo. (though not as bad as it might have been.)

Pippen's Freddy encounter with the Palantir. Too much SFX.

The thrashing camera shot as Frodo et al cling to cliff. (Too Blair Witch).

Finding the Isengard palantir in the water. (whaaa???)

No Saruman, which is followed by some relatively fluffy scenes. It should have been left in.
___________________________________________


Overall the editing was much much better than TTT. The charge of the Rohirrim was a great special effect. The addition of the ghost army, the calvary, and the Mumakil into one scene was a bit congested.


Lots of other bits I'll think of later.

[IronParrot]

The Return of the King - adaptation notes

Disclaimer

I've only seen it once. Opinions tend to change upon the second time out.


General impression

Aside from the omission of the entire Saruman arc - some of it left on the cutting-room floor, some of it never filmed at all - ROTK was probably the most direct adaptation of the three. That said, let's pre-empt the more inevitable subjects of debate.


Belated forging of Anduril

It works, though one wonders about the implication that it was triggered by Arwen's decision to stay in Middle-Earth, and whether or not Elrond would have done it regardless. In the grand scheme of things, this was not a problem.


Shelob's Lair gets juggled a bit

Frodo sending Sam off, going into the lair alone and narrowly escaping, then having a spat with Gollum and trying to make it through the tunnel again: aside from the flow of the Shelob sequence being slightly interrupted by its split in two, this was not a problem.

The big question here is whether or not it is at all in character for Sam to actually obey Frodo's order to leave him. Consider this: Sam has just been assured a few scenes earlier that Frodo knows he is on his side. The overwhelming sense of betrayal upon Frodo's complete reversal on this, combined with Gollum's apparent victory in the fight to be Frodo's squire, would be enough to repel him.

Drawing a comparison to the earlier scene at the end of Fellowship when Frodo tells Sam he's going ahead alone, but Sam joins him anyway: the key difference between the two is that in one scene, Frodo is accepting of Sam's dedication regardless.

It's quite obvious to Sam that the whole inciting incident is Gollum's wrongdoing; when he later sees the scattered lembas at the bottom of the stairs, that is more of a trigger than anything, a reminder that he made a promise that no snivelling schizophrenic gangrel-creature will keep him from fulfilling. It is reasonable to say that being told very directly by Frodo that he cannot and will not help, Sam is dejected enough to temporarily lose his sense of resolve. But he regains it in spades, and that's what matters.


Sam never puts on the Ring

It's consistent with how the films have made any contact with the Ring even more dangerous than in the book - for example, how in FOTR, Gandalf never touches the Ring at all, and in this one, is careful not to make direct contact with the palantir when he bundles it up. Sam still had possession of the Ring when Frodo was captured, so we get a good scene where he is reluctant to give it back to Frodo when the latter demands it back, which maintains the nature of the Ring's effect.


Dunharrow still exists, sort of

The implication in Towers was that by making Helm's Deep a safe haven, as opposed to splitting Rohan between Helm's Deep and Dunharrow, the latter was no longer existent as a back-rank refuge. The major result of this was the whole warg tangent in the mountains, which only works given the traversal of an open mountain path.

That said, by making Dunharrow a locale in the film that serves not only as the site of the Muster of Rohan but also the entrance to the Paths of the Dead, what does that say about the changes in TTT? Not much. Dunharrow is now more of an open encampment than a very established site, which evades questions of consistency.


No sign of the Woses

Actually, there's a Wose statue in Dunharrow on the way to the Paths of the Dead. That's good enough in my books; the movie seriously didn't need to concern itself with the details of Rohan's foreign policy. Not missed.


No Grey Company - just the Three Hunters and the Dead

In the best interests of paring down the quantity of different characters that need to be introduced, this works out fine. Bringing in Halbarad and the others would have been too much. One thing about ROTK that is very distinctive is that it introduces no new characters except Denethor, who was already given a decent entrance in Towers Extended. In pretty much every case, this was a good choice. Fundamentally, one does not want to be dealing with too many faces, especially at this late a stage when things are supposed to be wrapping up.

The Dead fight all the way to the Pelennor instead of stopping after the defeat of the Corsairs. Given the omission of the actual journey from the Paths of the Dead to Gondor, but the necessity of concluding their subplot onscreen, this not only makes sense but ends up looking really cool.

[IronParrot]

Arrivals at the Pelennor omit how they got there

The Ride of the Rohirrhim is not there, as mentioned above regarding the Woses. Nor is Aragorn's defeat of the Corsairs of Umbar prior to his arrival at the Pelennor; I am unaware if this was actually filmed, or if it remained unscripted in the first place.

Either way, something in the book is maintained: the timing of the arrivals on the Fields remains intact and surprising. It maintains Tolkien's sequence of events, and is far preferable to, say, working the journeys to Gondor in chronologically. Tolkien has a tendency to have his characters explain what happened to them after the fact. Short of the employment of long flashbacks, which would clearly be DVD material at the most, they would not fit.


Denethor jumps rather than dying on the pyre with the palantir

This may be the most problematic one. The lack of a palantir is the more excusable part. It works because the thing that drives Denethor off the edge and removes all sense of hope is when he sees the armies of Mordor at his doorstep, analogous to how he sees them from afar in the book.

The actual disappointment here is not an issue with the scene so much as how it alters one of the most memorable mental images from the book, that of Denethor clutching the palantir and forever leaving the impression of his burning hands behind while roasting on the pyre. The result is not unlike seeing Arwen atop Asfaloth at the Ford of Bruinen - it is shocking on the basis of being unexpected.

Regarding the development of Denethor's character, we see a certain reliance on the scenes of The Two Towers Extended to establish who he is and how he thinks. That's okay if you've watched the Extended Editions, which have pretty much established themselves as the proper cuts anyhow; but without that background, the truncation is a bit much. One fortunate thing about the films is the scene in FOTR where Boromir talks about his father; that offsets the lack to some extent.

As for the jump: it just happens all too quickly, and is not given enough time to sink in, especially intercut in the midst of everything else that is going on.


No confrontation between Gandalf and the Witch-King

This one was a letdown, and one that I get the impression was actually filmed. Hopefully it appears on the DVD. You see it set up - an Orc asks the Witch-King, "And what of the wizard?" to which he replies, "I will break him" - but after the front gates of Minas Tirith collapse, there is no sign of this standoff; we go straight to Rohan's horn-call and the Battle of the Pelennor Fields. Like the Huorns in the theatrical edition of The Two Towers, the movie still works coherently without it, but it is sorely missed nonetheless.


Merry and the audience both know who Dernhelm is from the start

Somewhere along the line the Jackson/Boyens team must have realized that being unable to mask both face and voice all that effectively, they might as well suck it up and make it pretty obvious that Éowyn is riding with the Rohirrhim and use that to their advantage - and yes, there were definitely advantages. For one, it drew a parallel between her and Merry that made the ensuing confrontation with the Witch-King all the more symbolic. This was a necessary change, and the best was made of it.


No Houses of Healing or the resolution of the Faramir/Éowyn arc

This absence is very conspicuous, given that the two are shown together as a happy couple in the coronation scene. It's inherently a challenge to figure out how to fit this in the film, considering that we are already talking about second-tier characters in a series of events that takes place during much more important things like the ride to the Black Gates and the journey to Mount Doom, and given that we already sit with a great deal of ending sequences. It was perfectly right to pare this down, but removing it entirely leaves an obvious vacuum. In short, this needs to be fleshed out in the DVD.

The additional fact that Merry is present at the Morannon raises some questions about the extent of his and Éowyn's injuries from stabbing the Witch-King - that is to say, the effects of doing so were toned down significantly. At the end of it all, we know not why Éowyn is so content.


No Beregond, Imrahil or that annoying nurse

Given the precedent set by FOTR and TTT - no Fatty Bolger, Bill Ferny, Quickbeam or Erkenbrand, to name a few - I don't think anybody is surprised by this. The film already had way too much to deal with in terms of character resolution, and even that was not achieved to completion in the theatrical version. Introducing new characters would be silly, and I'm glad they didn't do it.

[IronParrot]

Frodo and Sam traverse the plains of Gorgoroth

That is, as opposed to making their way through the eastern side of the mountains and sneaking around within an army of Orcs. This was a good choice - it highlighted the Morannon as not only a distraction for Sauron, but for all the forces of Mordor. Also, it evades the question of how given their physical stature, the hobbits could possibly visually blend in with the Orcs by way of armour alone.


No Mouth of Sauron or negotiations at the Morannon

Again, this is an instance of something that is conspicuously missing, but its absence does not hurt the film.

At the same time, by discarding the parallel structure of Book V and VI.1-3, we know very well at that point that Sam and Frodo are fine and are still in possession of the Ring. The Mouth of Sauron showing off goods such as the mithril vest would still have an impact on Gandalf and Aragorn, but no impact at all on the audience. It would come off as an extraneous gesture.

However, the curious thing about this scene is that someone was indeed cast as the Mouth of Sauron, and it may have been filmed. If so, its reinsertion would be welcome.


Gollum does not stumble into the fire right away

The big thing to deal with here was how to take Gollum's tripping into the fire seem neither comical nor overly serendipitous. The film does this, at the expense of drawing out the destruction of the Ring by way of Frodo counterattacking and the two having a second tussle - and this time, Frodo is visible.

Gollum does not scream "Precious!" as he falls, but those are still his last words, and Frodo's actions are in keeping with his character. I love the smile of satisfaction on Gollum's face even as he is consumed in a pool of magma.

As for the question of how Gollum was ever able to bite off Frodo's finger when it was invisible, a dangling question in the book - the device of using the footsteps worked out very cleverly.


The Shire is still standing

Okay, here's the biggie. Considering that the finer points behind the implications of Chapter VI.8's complete disappearance from history have been discussed to death already, I am going to confine this to its impact on how the film actually concludes.

Something that was absolutely vital to preserve - the Shire's idyllic innocence in how it remains completely oblivious to the goings-on of the outside world - stayed in the picture. At the end, we see a scene in the Green Dragon where the four hobbits are having drinks, knowing their lives will never be the same - especially in Frodo's case. But around them, life goes on in the Shire as it always has. They are not given the welcome of heroes.

This represents the conclusion of the "circular journey." The structure of The Lord of the Rings is not something linear with an expansion of something small into something far greater until the climax is reached and the ballooning story pops. Instead, we have a gradual inflation and deflation of scope. The story begins with hobbits in a decidedly non-fantastic homeland being drawn into the epicentre of a grand fantasy adventure. It ends with a fading of that fantasy, symbolized by the fading of the Elves.

We get a reaffirmation of the answer to the question: Why did this story happen? Why did Frodo ever leave with the Ring?

To save the Shire. And even with the Shire being intact, and "Sharkey's end" being discarded, that element is still in place. The decisive realization of this is how contrary to all conventional wisdom of cinema, which would have screamed for a fade to black after either the coronation or the departure of the last ship, Tolkien's ending stayed. That one gutsy move - of defying all pressure to zoom out, and staying in line with thematic development in the final shot by zooming in - makes the conclusion work. It makes the conclusion in keeping with Tolkien's focus on the idea of storytelling, and the idea of the Journey.


Somewhat final remarks

Again, this was written after only seeing the film once. If the precedent of the first two movies means anything, I will become more comfortable with some things and less comfortable with others as time goes by and I watch this a few more times. It should also be noted that while the Extended Edition will trump the current edit, what we have currently does work as a cohesive narrative.

In the end, whether or not the book was adapted successfully is a matter of personal levels of tolerance. No truly objective analysis is possible, but I've tried to push it in that direction, and my judgment is that one would be hard-pressed to find such a comprehensive and deep adaptation of a book to film anywhere. It has simply never been done before - not on this level. That is why, in terms of adaptation, the final product is a cinematic pinnacle. And in a final analysis, it's undeniably Tolkien.

[cassiopeia]

Thank you, IronParrot, for your interesting and thorough analysis. I look forward to seeing the ROTK in eight days' time.

I believe the Mouth of Sauron was filmed, and the actor involved was an Australian called Bruce Spence. It is a dissapointment he is not in the film, but he will surely be in the extended edition.

[Dúnedain]

Originally posted by cassiopeia
Thank you, IronParrot, for your interesting and thorough analysis. I look forward to seeing the ROTK in eight days' time.

I believe the Mouth of Sauron was filmed, and the actor involved was an Australian called Bruce Spence. It is a dissapointment he is not in the film, but he will surely be in the extended edition.

Same with Ghan-Buri-Ghan I know an actor was cast for the role, so I assume it was filmed as well...

[Catgirl]

I just finished watching ROTK. I think that it was probably the best of the three. The only part I didn't like was at the end in the shire, they kept the movie going far too long and they drew out Frodo's part a little too much. but other than that, it was a really good movie.
The special effects were Great in the battle scenes especially with the army that Aragorn raises up from the mountain, they were really cool. Also, they seemed to follow book very well, and it ended just right.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

RotK: a successful adaptation?

I fear I cannot share in the generally very favorable views of ROTK as a "successful adaptation." Adequate, yes, but no more then that. FOTR was clearly the best adaptation, TTT the worst. To identify two of the areas in ROTK that I view as, respectively, very poor, and barely adequate, adaptations consider the butchering of Denethor's role and the charge of the Rohirrim:

Especially exasperating in this, as in movie adaptations in other cases, are changes when closer adherence to the original would work better. For example, the changes involving Denethor. Instead of D despairing and telling Gandalf to take over if he wants we have bizarre and offensive assaults by Gandalf on the ruler of Gondor (with no reaction from his subjects). There is no book gradual deterioration of Denethor, from the TTT extended dvd to ROTK he is portrayed as an emotional analogue of Wormtongue. Even his scene eating while Pippin sings is unneccessarily twisted into a "Denethor eats while Gondor burns" bit. And the brilliant Tolkien denouement in "The Pyre of Denethor" is changed to Shadowfax attacking him (with Gandalf apparently actively seeking to destroy Denethor) and Denethor's highdive. On reflection, PJ and Co. warping of the character and actions of Denethor may end up being their worst "adaptation."

While the actual charge of the Rohirrim was adequate, I also believe it could have been much better done. The "dawnless day" was unwisely omitted. It would have brilliant cinematically, and fairly easy to do, to have the Rohirrim sneak up (perhaps with lightning flashes to illuminate them) and then to have a surprise charge, as in the book. Not a ridiculous "in your face" charge giving the enemy forces time to prepare. A key aspect to the initial success of the charge was the surprise element! And Theoden's charge would have been great if the sun came out as he charged, illuminating the flag of Rohan and dazzling the enemy (who, by the way, I thought were mainly Easterlings and Southrons) more colorful uniforms, pennants, etc. then the generic orcs.

With that he seized a great horn from Guthlaf his banner-bearer, and he blew such a blast upon it that it burst asunder. And straightway all the horns in the host were lifted up in music...Suddenly the king cried to Snowmane and the horse sprang away. Behind him his banner blew in the wind, white horse upon a field of green, but he outpaced it...His golden shield was uncovered, and lo! it shone like an image of the Sun, and the grass flamed into green about the white feet of his steed. For morning came, morning and a wind from the sea; and darkness was removed, and the hosts of Mordor wailed, and terror took them, and they fled, and died, and the hoofs of wrath rode over them. And then all the host of Rohan burst into song, and they sang as they slew, for the joy of battle was on them, and the sound of their singing that was fair and terrible came even to the City.

P. S. How about the sexist bit (Arwen seeing her son but not her two daughters).

[Varda Oiolosseo]

I thought that it was a great adaptation.
Special effects and everything.

With some of the characters from TTT such as Eomer, Eowyn and Faramir got justified in this one if that makes sense. In TTT Faramir was brough across in the wrong light but in ROTK you really realised what he was really like.

Denethor was a bit dodgy but still good.
I think they should have shown more of the Witch King
Also i really missed The Houses of Healing i thought they would have shown more of it and Eowyn and Faramir getting together.

But yes deffinatly a great movie and best out of the three.

[FoolofaTook]

I thought it was a pretty good adaptation. It wasn't perfect, but it was good. Has there ever been a perfect adaptation of a book into film? I thought RotK was probably the best movie out of the three, but I think FotR was the best adaptation. My opinions may change when I see RotK again, though.

[ethuiliel]

The movie was amazing, and I would have called it perfect if I didn't like the books as much as I do. As it is, I am sort of upset by some of the cuts. (for example the Houses of Healing, especially Faramir/Eowyn ) I left the theater depressed, but more for seeing the words "The End" than for disapointment in how the movie was made.

[Aewionen]

I thought the movie was great, besides a few dissapointing things. (Faramir/Eowyn, Saruman/Grima's death, and Beregond/Bergil) I hoped those things will be added into the EE. It was a pretty good adaption to the book though not perfect, still a really good movie.