Ornoth

I think it's appropriate to post my thoughts on the collected Lord of the Rings movies here. As I say, I was a rather obsessive Tolkien fan back in high school, so I think these opinions are fairly authoritative. On the other hand, everyone and his mother are Tolkien scholars these days, and they're all pontificating about the movies, so perhaps these observations will be of little value to anyone but myself.

LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING

When I was young, I was a major league Tolkien fan. I was one of the founding members of the New England Tolkien Society and edited their annual literary journal, Mazar Balinû. Yes, I had a hobbit name, too: Ornoth Sûlhimdil Brandybuck.

My reaction to "the Fellowship of the Ring" movie is very favorable. They certainly did a far better job than Ralph Bakshi in 1978 or Rank-and Base (sic) in '80. For the most part, the movie took great pains to stay true to the book, and most of the depictions were absolutely right on. But you want to know what was missing, don't you?

Well, my biggest criticism is that the movie didn't capture the sense of wonder that I associate with high fantasy. While the scenery was impressive, it just didn't provide the almost spiritual beauty of the primeval Middle Earth.

On the whole, I was disappointed with the portrayal of Tolkien's Elves. They initially appear as powerfully angelic, but after their initial introduction, they settle down to be nothing more than men with funny ears. They're either too on or too off, when the reality should be something in the middle. The portrayals of Elrond and Celeborn were particularly disappointing.

Those were my biggest criticisms. Here are the minor nits:

• Gollum's history as a proto-hobbit was lost
• The encounter with Gildor the Elf in the Shire was removed
• The evening at Farmer Maggot's was removed
• Fatty Bolger, the house in Crickhollow, and the Hedge were removed
• Tom Bombadil, Old Man Willow, and the barrow-wight were cut
• The dance at Bree was altered
• Finding the troll from Bilbo's adventure was left out
• Gandalf's messages at Bree and Amon Sûl were cut
• Why did they put the horse chase in slow-motion?
• Arwen professing her love of Aragorn isn't supposed to come until later
• Bilbo's volunteering to take the Ring was cut, absolutely amazingly!
• There was no mention of the Elven Rings borne by Elrond and Galadriel
• I expected Boromir to be larger, rounder, and more red-haired
• Gollum following them out of Lórien and down the Anduin was not mentioned

But overall, they did a fine job adapting the book to a movie, and what you see is very true to the image that Tolkien created in his book.

LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS

Unlike The Fellowship of the Ring, this movie strayed quite liberally from Tolkien's books, adding and deleting whole scenes, and altering the basic natures of characters. The most aggregious differences are that in Jackson's movie, Faramir succumbs to the lure of the ring, the Ents decide not to go to war, and Aragorn is missing and presumed dead for a while. While some of the differences were minor nits, some were very substantial.

Another major difference is that the movie ends quite a ways earlier than the books. The books include the reunion and confrontation at Isengard, Pippin and the palantír, and the subsequent separation again, as well as Frodo and Sam's trudge past Minas Morgul, the events at Cirith Ungol, and Frodo's capture while Sam bears the ring.

While some deletions must be made to keep the film's length reasonable, I can't understand why a director would take an immensely popular literary work and stray so far from the original as to add completely fabricated plot elements and dramatically alter the basic natures of important characters. There's no logic in that.

Here's the laundry list of noteworthy differences from the book:

• In the movie, Pippin simply spits the Elven cloak clasp onto the ground, rather than working his hands free and running some distance from the main path of his captors. The descent into Rohan from the Emyn Muil was deleted.
• The entire orc rivalry and Pippin's luring Grishnákh by pretending to have the ring was cut! An orc pursues the hobbits into Fangorn in the movie, whereas in the book, the hobbits chance upon Treebeard on a sunny ledge. In the book, Fangorn did not bring the hobbits to see "the white wizard".
• There is no mention of the Entwives, no Ent-draught, and no appearrance of Quickbeam. Amazingly, in the movie the Entmoot decides not to participate in the war, contrary to the book!
• Éomer gives the horses to the three hunters freely, rather than grudgingly and requiring Aragorn to return them to Edoras. Gimli has no apparent reluctance riding horses in the movie. Gimli's character in the movie is purely as comic relief, which really demeans his role and presence.
• The loss of the horses and the three hunters' nighttime visitation by a white wizard were cut.
• Unbelievably, Aragorn never tells Éomer or Théoden or Háma about Andúril or the fact that he is the rightful king of Gondor!
• There is an actual fight in Meduseld's halls. Furthermore, Théoden's recovery is depicted much more along the lines of an exorcism, whereas in the book Gandalf mostly simply convinces the king to throw off Gríma's counsel! There is never any mention that Théoden's sword is stashed away in Gríma's quarters.
• Éowyn doesn't lead the women and children to safety at Dunharrow, but tags along to Helm's Deep with the boys! The entire warg attack was not in the book, nor was Aragorn's fall and subsequent separation from the main host.
• In the book, Elrond never sent any Elves to fight at Helm's Deep. There's no mention of Erkenbrand's forces. Aragorn sallies forth with Gimli, rather than Legolas. The appearance of the Entwood at Helm's Deep is cut.
• Frodo and Sam's fall and the use of the Elven rope that was Galadriel's gift to Samwise to descend from the Emyn Muil was lost.
• Sam's bumbling fall and near-detection at the gates of Mordor did not happen in the book.
• In the book, Faramir refuses the ring, passing the test in the same manner as Galadriel. However, the movie twists it so that he lusts for the ring, and attempts to take Frodo and Sam back to Gondor! The entire attack on Osgiliath did not appear in the book.
• The movie ends prematurely, without depicting anything about the reunion at Isengard, the confrontation with Saruman, Pippin and the palantír, the trek past Minas Morgul and Cirith Ungol, Shelob, or Frodo's capture and Sam's period as ringbearer.

Still, despite the rather liberal interpretation of a work that many people dote on, and the fact that even the book is mostly filled with battles or the ringbearer's plodding along, the movie was reasonably enjoyable. I suspect that it will wind up being much like the Fellowship, in that subsequent viewings will enable me to ignore the differences and enjoy it simply for itself. Furthermore, I suspect that like the Fellowship, the Two Towers will probably come out with an expanded DVD containing extra footage, which will hopefully include much of the substantial deleted material.

LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING

If the Fellowship was “mostly true to the book”, and the Two Towers “strayed quite liberally” from them, the Return of the King was an outright butcher job.

It didn’t help that Jackson decided to end the Two Towers film far short of where Tolkien’s book left us. Because of that, Jackson had to fit an additional third of a book into the final, climactic Return of the King film, which itself contains enough material to exceed a single film. The result was a film that, despite running to three and a half hours, still gave us an emasculated Return of the King.

While that might sound a little hash given that Jackson’s slashing didn’t dramatically change the basic storyline, I think that anyone with the brazen audacity to attempt a LotR movie should endeavor to depict the books as faithfully as possible. While Jackson did significantly better than previous attempts, when push come to shove, literary fidelity lost out to expeditiousness and editorial caprice, resulting in a work that, despite beginning well, ended very poorly.

So what did Jackson do in Return of the King that was so egregious? Are you buckled in?

• The entire confrontation between Gandalf and Saruman and the breaking of Saruman’s staff were deleted.
• Rather than being thrown at Gandalf by Gríma Wormtongue, the palantír is found in a pool of water by Pippin.
• Rather than looking into the palantír on the road alone, Pippin looks into it at Edoras, with Merry looking on.
• At the time, Aragorn also grabs the palantír and looks into it, but no further mention is made of it in the movie. In the book, Aragorn later uses the palantír at Helm’s Deep to reveal himself to Sauron as the returned King of Gondor in order to further pressure Sauron to move before he is ready.
• In the movie, Aragorn and Gandalf accompany Théoden to Edoras. In the book, Gandalf and Pippin leave before the company returns to Helm’s Deep or Edoras, and Aragorn goes to Dunharrow directly from Helm’s Deep.
• In the movie, Gandalf is despondent at Edoras. Totally out of character.
• In the book, Halbarad and the remnants of the Dúnadain join Aragorn at Helm’s Deep and go with him via Dunharrow on the Paths of the Dead, as do Elrond’s sons Elladan and Elrohir. They bring both the king’s standard and counsel from Elrond regarding the Paths of the Dead. All this was cut from the movie.
• In the movie, the Grey Company’s horses bolted at the gates to the Paths of the Dead. In the book, they don’t.
• Absolutely no mention is made of the corpse the Grey Company encounters on the Paths.
• The book has Aragorn summon the Dead to the Stone of Erech, where they debate before joining him; the movie doesn’t mention Erech, and the debate occurs in the tunnels.
• In the movie, the muster of Rohan takes place in Dunharrow, not Edoras.
• The whole bit about Arwen going to the havens and turning back did not appear in the book. Nor did the ridiculous crap of her taking ill as a result of Sauron’s strength.
• In the movie, Andúril is reforged and brought to Aragorn at Dunharrow by Elrond. In the book, it was reforged prior to the fellowship’s departure from Rivendell, and Aragorn bore it thence.
• Throughout the movies, Elrond is depicted as selfish and negative, completely out of character.
• The whole scene where Gandalf has Pippin light Minas Tirith's beacon never happened in the book.
• Bergil and Beregond and their friendship with Pippin do not appear at all.
• Prince Imrahil of Dol Amroth was removed entirely.
• The movie had Pippin go with Gandalf to assist Faramir’s retreat from Osgiliath.
• The song Pippin sings to Denethor (“Upon the hearth the fire is red”) only appears in the trilogy when the hobbits are leaving the Shire, between the encounter with the black rider that drives them off the road and their meeting Gildor. It is most emphatically not a plainchant. It is described as a walking song, and Pippin ends it in a particularly high and emphatic “And now to bed!”
• What is up with Gandalf’s Kosmik Karate against Denethor? That wasn’t in the book and is totally out of character for Gandalf.
• Beregond’s saving Faramir from Denethor was removed, and Denethor is amazingly accidentally killed by Gandalf. In the book, Denethor kills himself, with the palantír in his hands.
• The movie barely even depicts one of the most important symbols of power: the lack of a dawn during Sauron’s strength, and the return of the light during his defeat.
• The entire ride of the Rohirrim is deleted, including the Woses and Ghân-buri-Ghân.
• In the movie, Éowyn and Merry and Faramir tag along for the march to the gates of Mordor. In the book, they are all near death in the Houses of Healing. Ioreth professes that the hands of the king ae the hands of a healer, and Aragorn confirms his royalty by finding some athelas and healing them before the march to the gate. While recovering back in Minas Tirith, Éowyn and Faramir’s romance blossoms. Amazingly, all this was completely cut from the movie.
• The parley with the Mouth of Sauron was deleted.
• The scene where Gollum tosses the lembas never appeared in the book.
• It is totally and utterly out of character for Frodo to side with Gollum and abandon Sam, telling him to go home. Complete fabrication.
• Sam’s following the orcs beneath Cirith Ungol is deleted, as is his lengthy use of the Ring and resulting reputation as a mighty Elf warrior. The Watchers outside Cirith Ungol are also completely deleted.
• In the movie, Sam tells Frodo that he doesn’t expect there to be a return journey; in the book, Frodo tells Sam.
• Frodo and Sam’s “capture” and forced march by orcs from Durthang was also completely deleted.
• Aragorn’s final confirmation of kingship—finding a sapling of the White Tree—was also cut.
• Sharkey/Saruman’s destruction of the Shire was completely cut, eviscerating the end of the book and the hobbits’ reputation as heroes within the Shire.

As you can see, Jackson only depicted about 60% of Tolkien’s final volume, and introduced some capricious and lamentable additions of his own devising. From the standpoint of capturing what Tolkien wrote, both in terms of specific details as well as the wonder and magic, Jackson’s Return of the King is a dreadful finale to a project that started out pretty promising.

As for the trilogy overall, it’s still a pretty good effort. Capturing Tolkien is not something that could be easily done, and Jackson made a far better showing than any previous attempt. Still, I think it became obvious that he’d bitten off more than he could digest when he moved a third of the Two Towers from the second to the third movie, and even a three and a half hour running time couldn’t accomodate the amount of material that needs to be depicted in order to do justice to the story.

Is it worth seeing? Yes. Is it faithful to the books? Moreso than any other attempt, but I’d say it only gets a C+ for fidelity. Is it an utter failure? No, Jackson did well within the constraints he was given.

In the end, I did enjoy the movies. They were entertaining, and I hope that they inspire yet another generation of fans who will accept fantasy as a valid literary genre, and then mature from more juvenile high fantasy to the more adult low fantasy that DargonZine publishes.

Well, it's been a few days, so I suppose it's high time to file my report on the Scotland trip.

As a reminder, I am the founder and editor of DargonZine, a magazine which prints the output from a collaborative writing project that is dedicated to creating a writers' community and inspiring and growing aspiring amateur writers. Founded in 1984, it is the longest-running electronic magazine on the Internet.

Each year, one of our writers hosts our annual Dargon Writers' Summit, a weekend of writing and socializing in the host's home town. Our previous Summits have all been in the US: Boston, Denver, Washington D.C., Chicago, New York, Pittsburgh, and San Jose. But this year we extended the Summit to a full nine days in order for Stuart Whitby to show eight of us around his entire nation: Scotland!

I'm not going to go into painstaking detail about the trip, but I did want to summarize it and make a few observances here.

But before I get into that, some other pointers. First, my personal site, OrnothLand, already has brief descriptions of what we did each day, with a handful of photos. Second, I'll be writing an exhaustive travelogue, which will be available in the near future. If you're interested in that, drop me a line at ornoth@rcn.com. But be warned: my weekend travelogues are usually about 30 pages, so this one might well wind up being as large as 90 pages of text! Finally, as soon as I can get the photos approved by the writers, a new 2002 Dargon Summit page will be available on the DargonZine Web site. Each of these will have a slightly different take on the trip.

For now, I'll just summarize. Six castles. Two cairns. Two ruined cathedrals. Watching our host jump off a cliff into a narrow, raging, freezing mountain cataract. Reading ghost stories beneath an alien orange full moon in a ruined castle on a cliff above the sea, the castle Bram Stoker's inspiration for writing "Dracula". Flying eagles, owls, falcons, and hawks at a falconry center. Wading alone into mist-shrouded Loch Ness. Drinking forbidden absynthe, the wormwood liqueur favored by 19th century writers. Scrambling to keep a grip on the edge of the world, a sheer 864-foot drop beneath me, as I climbed the face of Arthur's Seat in Edinburgh. Taking a distillery tour and drinking more beer and scotch whisky than wisdom would indicate. Seeing my own face staring back at me from a Pepsi can. Haggis; neeps and tatties; bangers and mash; Irn-Bru; and the omnipresent 80 shilling. Weather that alternated between sun and rain every 20 minutes, every day, without fail. A distillery pictured on the Scottish 10 pound note. BEUM! Deep Sea World, the Fisheries Museum, scenic Crail Harbour, and some fantastic go-karting (bruised myself heavily by driving so aggressively). Rhonda setting off the hotel fire alarm. Late night talks about relationships, family, and sex. Asking a young waitress to bring me "Vanilla ice cream, nude". The religious experience of the mountains. Rainbows everywhere, especailly Glencoe. Closing the 1000-mile circumnavigation of the country in Glasgow, with lots of sidewalk leering. Cutting 3 CD-ROMs with 2400 photos and video clips for everyone.

But what really mattered in all that? What really impacted me?

Let's start with the countryside: it was incredible. Mountains that leap up above you in piles of scree that defy the angle of repose, topped with unbelievable cliffs, punctuated with frequent streams of snow runoff that cascade down the face of the mountain in waterfalls, spilling into the inevitable valley river or loch in a speeding torrent. The endless, sumptuous green carpet of woods and farmland, punctuated by the unique bright yellows of alfalfa in the fields, gorse and forsythia on the slopes. The constant parade of picturesque and ancient bulidings: proud cathedrals, self-consciously conspicuous castles, long-abandoned farmhouses. But oh! the castles. The cold, passive strength of a granite wall. The understated grace of the entry arch and towers of a curtain wall. The sense of walking in the footsteps of Mary Queen of Scots, Edward I, Robert the Bruce, and Rob Roy MacGregor... Standing on an outer wall, hundreds of feet above the plain, sharing the feeling of power that the residents of those castles atop the crags must have felt. It was like wallowing in that sense of wonder that only a good fantasy story can evoke, and being for once truly a participant in those wonderful tales. The only words I can come up with to describe the land are 'wonder' and 'majesty'.

Ever since I was a child growing up in Maine, I've had a very close, spiritual affinity for the silent woods and the rocky crags. I wish that I'd been able to spend less time on this trip as the leader of a noisy group of tourists, so that I could spend a little more time to appreciate, to experience a spiritual connection with the amazing places that we visited. The closest I came was in our death-defying climb of Arthur's Seat. Despite being implausibly steep and a wonderful challenge to climb, it was a mere hillock in comparison to most of the amazing landscape we traversed, including the breathtaking Ben Nevis, more than five times the height of Arthur's Seat.

The other items of note all relate to my relationship with my companions: my writers. One of the surprises was that I received almost universal expressions of support for taking a more authoritarian role as editor. This has always been anathema to me, because I view consensus as the only way to instill a sense of ownership for the project in my writers, and as a requirement for delegating work to others. However, nearly everyone I spoke to balked, and suggested that I both rely less on others for useful work, as well as take more of the decisionmaking upon myself. I'm slowly allowing myself to be convinced, but it really is a major philosophical shift for me. I do think that this would integrate well with the board of directors structure that we are establishing, in that writers who feel a strong degree of ownership and want to have input can participate on the board, while other writers, who don't have the desire or time to do anything but write, can do that. The next step here will be figuring out how to present all that to the group so that it goes over, without sounding like me trodding on toes.

But more importantly than the feedback I got about the structure of the writing group were the relationships that we built. Over the course of ten days together, we formed an intense, very personal bond. We talked about our family histories and our childhoods; we talked about our growth as sexual beings and our relationships. For my part, I was comfortable enough to at least reveal to people my own two biggest insecurities, and was rewarded with several very touching and surprising responses. We offered one another compassion and understanding and a closeness that I'd never felt before. At times it approached a sort of sexual tension, but it wasn't dirty; it was more like an intimate closeness that was far more meaningful than anything physical.

In the end, I was truly amazed by the wonderful friendships that have about amongst this group. I'm really awestruck that almost two decades after I founded it, the community of writers that I created solely for my own benefit has produced such a strong, genuinely caring, close-knit group of people. They really are my family, and I'm honored that DargonZine, which I've always stated was my life's work, has brought these individuals together and not just helped them as writers, but also provided a cohesive, loving, supportive community for them.

The awesome landscape and impressive castles made Scotland a wonderful vacation and great research for a fantasy writer; but it was the people and the relationships we built that made it something magical. It's awesome to see that this trip worked so well on all those levels, and it still amazes me that I had some role in bringing it about.