LOTR: Return of the King discussion (spoiler thread))

Originally posted by Asper

Beldaran, I think this is where the mouth of Sauron scene was cut from, other similar "mistakes" are:
In the pyre scene Gandalf no longer has his staff and grabs a spear to hit Denethor with. Apparently a fight scene between Gandalf and the witch king was cut out probably from just before this one.
Frodo and Sam goto the trouble of getting on the orc armour yet on the slopes of Mt. doom they are without it and no explanation. The missing scene is when they are travelling across Mordor as orc soldiers in the book.
I'd presume these will be restored for the extended cut, and I'm hoping for a better rescue of Frodo by Sam, that being the major disappointment for me.
Someone else posted something deriding(sp?) the ride to the black gates for just being a diversion.

Interesting.

I find the possible inconsistencies intriguing, given the huge attention spent to every detail of these films.

As an aside: I probably was the one deriding the ride (what alliteration!) to the Black Gate, though I wasn't trying to be derisive as such - just pointing out a seeming lack of continuity in the flow of the story. And like Beldaran, I thought the sudden disappearance of all horses a little harsh on our equine friends.

Especially if that meant the Mouth had just gobbled them all up off-screen ;) .

Anyway, what about a discontinuity thread? Anyone want to start one?
 
A new threads ok.

I really thought the battle by the gate was dumb. I was under the impression that the humans had like 400 guys versus 40000000000000000000 orcs. I hate it when the odds are always stacked up against the humans, it makes my parents blab about how stupid it was that 200,000 orcs would piss their pants when the 5000 Rohirrim came.

However, the coming of the Mumakil, now that was SAHWEET! You could somewhat see that the two were in a way rivals. It also really touched me that those two allies would charge into almost certain death for eachother.

thought gandalf and the witchking would fight, not the chick killing the witchking

Ya, I was hoping for a little fight between the two of them, like in the previews. After I saw how Gandalf sent those Nazgul harrasing the retreating humans running, I said to myself "Witch King has no chance"

Then there was that scence with the WK talking about killing Gandalf, they never really saw eachother much in the battle.

BTW, during the suicide run with Faramir, my dad choked on his straw. (because he expected the humans to send the orcs running since that seems to be the trend.)
 
*puts on his orc hat* I don't think I'd be too ballsy staring down an armoured charge on a massive plan. Historically, numbers mean way less when you're in that situation, and this is at least due in part to the fact that a couple thousand guys on horses wearing steel head to toe is pretty damn scary.
 
I'm with saintjon on this one. 40 to 1 odds sounds like more than it is.

In this case, the 5000 in question are highly-motivated cavalry charging into the unprepared flanks and rear of an army already occupied with cracking the hard nut of Minas Tirith....

The average orc or goblin was probably a lot more interested in his own survival than in standing firm against the en masse mounted charge of their ancestral enemy. As a species they might be well suited to killing and looting, but probably not so much towards soldiering, which really demands an appreciation of discipline.

When the Rohan charge hit, it was certain death for the orcs and goblins in the first few ranks (totally swamped and dispatched as they were passed by rank after rank of riders), and the ones in subsequent ranks, perhaps with no real leadership given that this was the rear of the army, crumbled and ran like a mob rather than standing and using their greater numbers. Greater numbers don't count for much if each guy fights and dies individually against an enemy force functioning as a unit.
 
Last edited:
Historically speaking, a heavy horse charge can break any army, even head-on, let alone hitting the rear of an unprepared army charging downhill! Made absolute sense.
 
Originally posted by Shehzad
Historically speaking, a heavy horse charge can break any army, even head-on, let alone hitting the rear of an unprepared army charging downhill! Made absolute sense.
Yeah, you're right! And then there's even the morale factor: when the charging riders clash the opposing army, the first ranks are slayn, those behind them see death before their eyes, fall prey to panic, start to retreat and fear quickly spreads through the whole army which gets helpless. History is full of similar situation, where a smaller but more motivated army put to rout a bigger but less motivated one.
And in Middle Earth the Rohirrim were renomed for their deadly charges, while orcs had no discipline: they crash and smash until anything goes well, but when things turn bad they lose all of their courage.

I loved the Rohirrim in the whole Lotr book, it saddened me a bit seeing how their stealthy ride to Pelennor was spoiled the way the movie does, giving the orcs time to draw up in order to face their charge. This way it was a lot spectacular, but it lost all of its adrenalin the book gives you.
Spectacular (needlessly too long) as well is the counterattack by the oliphaunts, but here the front charge by the Rohirrim semt a bit too dumb: they could just flank them and attack them from rear, the casualties would have been lesser, the oliphaunts were only eight or ten and weren't as agile in movement as a rider.

But I agree with what others stated before in this thread: this is not Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings", this is Jackson's "Lord of the Rings". And under this point of view, the whole movie gets more enjoyable.:)
 
Hey! I didn't say I didn't think it was possible, I said my parents were like "Ya, sure."

You see, my parents don't watch these kind of movies, play these kind of games, read these types of books, or study this kind of warfare. They see a bajillon orcs, and a jillion horses, and they assume the orcs have the upperhand.
 
Well, thanks to your sffworld buds you can now broaden their knowledge of historical warfare I guess :D.

From personal experience I can tell you that they probably won't care too much though lol.
 
O yes, I learned long ago not to tell my parents about the contents of my games.

I remember when I first got Warcraft 2 back in the 20th century....
It was my first war game, and my first game that showed blood. I was so amazed I wanted to share my joy with everyone.

"Mom, dad! Watch, I tell the knight to attack this green alien and look what he does!!!!"

*clash of sword and eventual death of orc*

After that I wasn't allowed to play Wacraft 2 for a long time, my parents even hid the disk.
 
Last edited:
Okay, I have a question that bugs me about ROTK every time I've seen it...


You know the scene where Gandalf rides out of Minas Tirith, towards the Gondorian Soldiers who are retreating from Osgiliath? It's right out of the book, it's the scene where Gandalf raises his staff and shoots white light at the Nazgul who fly away in fear...

As I said, it's right out of the book, EXCEPT for one small detail. Considering that this detail is NOT in the book, but also makes almost NO sense in the film, I don't get why they did it???? UNLESS the scene is longer in the Extended Edition, and then makes sense....

This change is.........PIPPIN is riding on the front of Shadowfax with Gandalf....WHY!?!?!?! WHY!?!??!?!?!!?!? In the book Pippin sees it from high up in the city. But why would Gandalf, who has already been in the city for a while, just get Pippin to hop on Shadowfax with him and rush out to face the Nazgul and try and save the soldiers? It makes no sense!
 
I would bet that the scene wasn't originally filmed and the only scenes with Gandalf in white on shadowfax included Pip. So a CG artist would have lifted those images and noone picked up the mistake. Plausable?
 
I have a feeling I'll never hear the true reason for this one, but it really bugs me! I mean, Pippin is cool and all, but why would he go with him?!? WHY GOD, WHY!?!?!?!?!?!?
 
This may have been asked before, but if so, I missed it.

I understand the theatrical version of "Return" will be on sale on May 25th (VHS and DVD) and can be pre-ordered now. But does anyone know when the extended version will be available? The LOTR site rather ominously mentions a "holiday release". Surely they don't mean... Christmas :( ??
 
Originally posted by Julian
This may have been asked before, but if so, I missed it.

I understand the theatrical version of "Return" will be on sale on May 25th (VHS and DVD) and can be pre-ordered now. But does anyone know when the extended version will be available? The LOTR site rather ominously mentions a "holiday release". Surely they don't mean... Christmas :( ??
My local wholesaler told me it will be out worldwide in november: today you buy the theatrical version, then you buy the extended. Double gain for them. ;)
 
Originally posted by Duraccione

My local wholesaler told me it will be out worldwide in november: today you buy the theatrical version, then you buy the extended. Double gain for them. ;)

Arghhh! That made sense when we had new LOTR films to look out for in December, but now..? I'd really hoped the release date would have been pushed forward a bit (with a special-deluxe-all-three-films-boxed-set-with-lifesized-Arwen-doll or something coming out in time to be snapped up by Santa). Bugger!
 
I've wondered the same thing many times Julian.. I don't think we'll know more until at least May..

All we can do at this point is be grateful that we're getting the Theatrical version 3 months early. It WOULD make sense for the Extended to then be released in mid August, as opposed to November, but I too have seen several mentions of the Extended Edition being in time for "The Holidays..."

What I think this means is that it may still come out in November. I don't think there's ANY chance of a Christmas release, that wouldn't make ANY sense at all. It'll either be November, or, if we're really lucky, August.
 
An online store I just visited mentions that the extended "Return" will be released on November 11 (yes, 2004!) and that the running time is 251 minutes (= 4 hours, 11 minutes).

Does anyone have any further info? The LOTR site doesn't seem to provide much clarification... :rolleyes:
 
251 minutes? That's LONG. I can't wait to see all the bits they so blatantly cut out of the theatrical version.

By the time the DVD is released I'll be getting close to my due date (I'm pregnant, that is) so I can only imagine the number of pee breaks I'm going to need to watch that mammoth! (But still looking forward to it!) :D
 
I'm watching the DVD right now! I had to take a break.

I borrowed the DVD from my sister, I usually buy the Extended Versions.

As far as I'm concerned, LOTR could be 16 hours long and I'd still watch it!
 

Sponsors


We try to keep the forum as free of ads as possible, please consider supporting SFFWorld on Patreon


Your ad here.

Latest posts

Back
Top