quote:

---

Originally posted by Wedge:
and the Scouring of the Shire has been cut altogether (it interrupted the "flow," he claims).

---

My interpretation of this "quote" is that PJ simply means we won't get to see the Shire being scoured in real time while it's actually happening, as he had once indicated far ealier in production. I'm still expecting that we will see the Shire already scoured when they return, just as it happens in the book. That's just conjecture, I know, but I find it hard to believe that PJ would have already made the decision to cut it entirely when they haven't even started editing ROTK yet. And one of the cast members (I believe it was Mr. Bloom) confirmed that the scenes with Saruman in the Shire were filmed, so it's not like they don't have the material in the first place.

The bit about Shelob is interesting. That would have to mean that Frodo's "death" also does not occur until the beginning of ROTK, eliminating a key emotional finale to TTT. Maybe PJ is trying to appease uninitiated viewers who were ticked off by the non-ending of FOTR? Either that, or Frodo still "dies," but we don't get to see who the culprit is until ROTK.

The Shelob thing doesn't bother me so much. He moved lots around for Fellowship (even made the start of two Towers fellowships ending) and I like how he doesn't want to end with a climax. When we can watch all 3 films back to back theatrically on at DVD at home, no one will care.

...and then we have the scouring... Hmmmphh well I have faith enough in Jackson not to worry about this being deleted from Return of the King. The movies are, after all, his take on the books and not a straight adaptation...

Peter, some Charlie Rose interviews have been allowed to feature on the odd DVD here and there, Cast Away and X0men are two that immediately spring to mind, both Fox though, is his show a Fox thing? (We dont get it in the UK).

Dan

PS: Jackson has spoken of a scene Fran Walsh shot showing how Smeagol became Gollum (+ Smeagol's birthday...etc). I think this would be a great addition for those who have not read the books.

I think that's very bad news. I wasn't happy with the reduction of Frodo by having Arwen save him in FOTR, but at least it was in the middle of the film (and my only bigger complaint). But these two now both are at the END of the other movies. I don't want to leave the theater disappointed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marian Schedenig:
Just read the reports myself. Apparently, PJ said that he never really liked the Scouring, so I guess we have to accept that they may not even have filmed parts of it.

I think that's very bad news. I wasn't happy with the reduction of Frodo by having Arwen save him in FOTR, but at least it was in the middle of the film (and my only bigger complaint). But these two now both are at the END of the other movies. I don't want to leave the theater disappointed.

[b]NP: Born on the Fourth of July (John Williams)[/B]

---

I'm with Jackson on this one, The Scouring of the Shire is a fine coda for the books, but would be ineffective in a movie. An excellent add-on for the DVD, though. It doesn't change the ending, it just happens after the ending.

And even if i disgreed with his choice, he has pretty much bought off any criticism by succeeding so well in the casting, production, fidelity, etc issues in the first movie. It's not like he's going to pull off a Phantom Menace and an Attack of the Clones.

Unless Jackson can dream up entirely new ways of providing closure for each of these characters that works just as well as the Scouring of the Shire, I can't go along with him on this one.

And I'm sure it'll hurt him like a dagger in his liver when he finds out I only saw the movie twice this time instead of five times.

quote:

---

Galadriel's present to Sam would be totally useless without it

---

Jackson has said, in the extended gift giving seen we'll all see on the DVD, Galadriel now gives Sam rope, so there wont be a continuity issue with her gift for Sam in the film.

Dan

Was at a party and it came on TV, yet a dilemma lye ahead us -- the CD player was playing and there was no sound coming from the TV!

45 minutes later, still no sound.

Needless to say, I got to see the fat bastard silently talk for a damn near hour.

For shame... For shame.

Damn alcohol, you do have negative effects sometimes.

quote:

---

And without the Scouring, there isn't that much of a point in showing the peace and naivity of the Shire so well at the beginning of FOTR

---

Oh come now that's pushing it. That's there to establish the lifestyles Hobbits adopt, and how they are as beings (jolly shoeless folk who eat and sing a lot)...

As for the rope, what's to say PJ wont MAKE it significant for Sam in either of the next two films? C'mon Marian, I know its a sad thing to lose but its not there, it never will be there and we'd best just get used to it...

I know your comments were directed at Marian, but considering that so far I agree with him 100% on this issue they apply to me as well.

Like you said, we have well over a year to get used to it. While I might be feeling a lot of despair and anger right now, believe me when I say I have every hope that by the time the film hits theaters I (and Marian too) will have gotten over it.

Yes, we will get used to it during the next two years. But I will still miss it when I see the movie.

Furthermore, I get the feeling that much of the scouring of the Shire had a lot to do with Tolkien's feelings about the post-WWII world in which he had written the books.

quote:

---

Furthermore, I get the feeling that much of the scouring of the Shire had a lot to do with Tolkien's feelings about the post-WWII world in which he had written the books.

---

Oh absolutely, it's very much from a vision Tolkien had of the destruction of the Oxfordshire countryside he lived in.

Listen, I am very much with all of you in feeling it will be oh so greatly missed, but I am not one to go nuts over something like this when I know there is absolutely nothing I can do about it, I'm just not one to waste time getting upset over such issues.

Again, I have absolute faith in PJ that he will deliver in one way or another. It's good he's come out and told the fans this now, and I've no doubt there's lots he's not telling the fans too!

The films are a separate entity from the books. The characters in the film are going to encounter different situations than many they faced in the novels. Of all thre three films PJ has recently said Two Towers will be the most radically different in tone and pacing, I am just hoping this doesn't start of a backlash from my fellow book fans who embraced his vision of Fellowsip that will continue on into Return of the King just because the scouring is gone.

Dan

No, I believe that I will appreciate what Jackson does, but there will be elements that I will miss. For example, I missed, in Fellowship, the idea that Gimli was quite aware of the dangers of Moria, but it didn't impair my ability to enjoy the film.

The Two Towers is the middle of a book, and it will be the middle of this uber-film that Jackson is making. I can see that this one would be the hardest to adapt, as it is multilinear and very anti-climactic. If the changes are as in keeping with the spirit of the original as the decisions in Fellowship, then I will have no problems with it.

The scouring of the Shire, however, is a different story. The truth is that just as Frodo is mortally wounded by the Nazgul, and can never truly recover, so too are the Hobbits unable ever to regain their innocence in a world where this has happened.

quote:

---

This is very much a point of The Lord of the Rings and I am worried that this will be lost.

---

I think the essence of what the scouring means will remain in the film somehow. PJ knows how much the scene means to some people, and it wouldn't shock me if he takes the scenes implications and turns it into something new. He's always said what he cuts he will still reference when he can in one way or another...

The BAFTAs begin in fifteen minutes. Go Howard, GO FELLOWSHIP!

Dan

Keeping the spirit of the Scouring will be difficult. Because it has two spirits. It's important for the Shire, and it's important for Saruman. I guess PJ will keep the Shire part intact somehow, but I see no way how he can keep the Saruman bit.

In fact, it looks very much like he's moving Shelob to part 3 because he wants to kill Saruman at the end of TTT. And that DOES worry me...

I forgot: For which BAs is FOTR nominated?

NP: Anton Bruckner: Symphony #0 (National Symphony Orchestra of Ireland, Georg Tintner)

Dan

It was funny, McKellen was on this chat show and the other guest whas this chap who'd crashed his car and had a bit of wooden fence go straight through him (interesting combination of guests, I know). The presenter turns to McKellen and asked him if he knew of anyone who'd been hurt like that, to which Mckellen said "no, although Chris Lee does suffer a similar a fate in Two Towers"...

Now, he could of course have meant to say ROTK, he did however distincly say TT regardless. In ROTK it could serve as a slightly less gory end to Saruman than having his throat slit if it is in fact an ROTK scene.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dan Brecher:
Anything on the Bloom comment over at OneRing.net?

---

Indeed. Here's their report. What makes this more curious is that if you go to the web site with the translated interview, the translator (who appears to be an amateur) admits that he did a very "crappy" translation on the statement where Orlando reveals this point.

It's been known for a long time that Saruman dies on a Spikey Wheel. It's just that people always kept hoping that he installed that Spikey Wheel in the Shire - and the mill in Frodo's vision in the mirror DOES have a Spikey Wheel - but of course, there are several of them in Isengard.

If Jackson really choose to take it out of TROTK, then I must say he probably did the right choice.

André: As I said, I could understand if he decided to shorten it (drastically perhaps). But removing it removes an integral part of the whole story - two actually, as I said above, the Shire part of it and the Saruman part of it.

Plus, the movie will end anticlimatically, anyway. After the destruction of the Ring, there has to be Aragorn's crowning, and later the Grey Havens. And he can't just cut from one to the other. A shortened Scouring would serve as a good transition - the Hobbits have returned to the Shire, see what Saruman has done, fix things as well as they can, Sam plants the tree. A year later, the tree has grown, Frodo goes to the Havens. Works fine if you ask me.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marian Schedenig:
A shortened Scouring would serve as a good transition - the Hobbits have returned to the Shire, see what Saruman has done, fix things as well as they can, Sam plants the tree. A year later, the tree has grown, Frodo goes to the Havens. Works fine if you ask me.

---

Hummmm... I can't agree.
It definitly won't work.
Maybe for us (who read the book) it may work, but for the general audience it will just make the movie endless and VERY anti-climatic, like Spielberg's biggest fiasco, A.I.

In Peter Jackson I trust.
He will find a way to bring the trilogy to a great closing without losing the spirit of Tolkien's work.