Slashdot Mirror
Saruman Completely Cut from 'Return of the King'
Dolemite_the_Wiz writes "Multiple News Sources report that Christopher Lee's Character Saruman will not appear in the LOTR: ROTK at all. From what I've been reading, the scenes total seven minutes and is a vital component of the whole storyline that the 'masses' should see in the theatrical cut of ROTK. Of course these scenes will be included in the DVD 'Special Edition' of ROTK. I've got tremendous faith in Peter Jackson's talents as a filmmaker. I've been a fan since his first movie but haven't read the LOTR trilogy books...yet. (I'm waiting for ROTK to hit the theaters) Given the fact that I haven't read the books but am a huge movie snob, how can you not have any sort of resolution of a character that has played a key component in the three movies? Articles on this story can be found at BBC, Christopher Lee Web, and theonering.net."
I think the movies are perhaps an interesting story, but they are *not* The Lord of the Rings.
The mistake they made was not making 6 movies (one for each book), and doing every single line of dialog exactly like the book, and shooting each shot exactly the way the book describes it, and fleshing out the images the way we imagined it. So what if most people don't like it -- it would rock.
Maybe Bravo or some independent director can do it properly in a few years when killer CGI is cheap.
Why do you FUCKING LAZY internet nerds insist on patronizing "petitiononline.com"? Name ONE FUCKING EXAMPLE where this loser site has made ANY difference at ALL.
PJ will not even LOOK at this assinine crap. Petitiononline is a FUCKING JOKE.
You weren't, by any chance, expecting the movies to be exact translations of the books, word for word, to the screen, were you? Of course not. You knew they were going to be adaptations just as everyone else did. Judging, then, from your apparent complaints against the movies, I ask you why you saw them at all, knowing as you must have that certain scenes would have to be cut/altered (who here actuallt believed Tom Bombadil would be in the movie)?
I'd love a 150 hour LotR epic just as much as the next geek. Then again, maybe I wouldn't. That's what the book is for.
There they were, sitting in the van with all those dials, and the cat was dead. -V. Marchetti, CIA
if you want "No More Hiroshimas" then I say "You First. No More Pearl Harbors."
Just One of Those Things?
Like changing the fundamental psychological make-up of the characters (Fellowship of the Ring)? Like using unchanged dialog from the books, but having it spoken by someone else (The Two Towers)? Like leaving out the ending?
Did he even *read* Lord of the Rings?
Argh...
You almost grasp it. So close.
It is after the climax of the physical action. It is not after the climax of the story.
Tolkien knew more about literature than any 300,000 registered slashdot readers combined. I used to think that the Scouring of the Shire seemed out of place in the Lord of the Rings, but I eventually realized that Tolkien must have put it there for a reason, and if I wanted to understand the book, one place to start was figuring out why he thought that section was worth including.
This makes me think that other pieces that were easily excised for the movie must in some way be some of the most important, for Tolkien could have just as easily left them out, but chose not to.
Tom Bombadil
Good riddance. Most annoying chapter(s) in the whole series...
"Quotation is a serviceable substitute for wit." --Oscar Wilde
No you need to work on your reading skills.
There's this thing called literature. You can only get it if you actually do some work, 'cause it can't be poured into your head like TV or movies, while you sit there passively munching popcorn or hot pockets. That work is called "reading."
If a novel, universally acclaimed as a great work of literature seems "wordy as fuck" to you, then that's a sign that your reading skills are poor, and need improvement, not that the author needs to "work on his writing skills a bit."
The whole story line of needing to draw Sauron out early was shot to crap when Frodo stood in Osgiliath and tried to give the ring to one of the Wraiths.
Having him then lightly tripse back to Morder without all the armies of Sauron hot on his tail was such a big plot hole and such an example of absolutely crappy writing, that the screenwriter should crawl under a rock in shame. That scene showed, more than anything, that Jackson is either a clueless idiot who doesn't have a stinking clue about the books, or a slimy snake who, in his own ego, actually thinks he's written a better story than Tolkien.
And, on a conspiracy note, I suspect Saruman's scenes were cut because Lee's morning greeting to Jackson was: Well, how are you going to rape the books today, Pete?
You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
They live in fear, knowing they can't defend themselves. Therefore they dread breaking the fragile 'peace' they think exists. Hell, the USA can't 'really defend' itself against a concerted terrorist attach. The USA can't even keep illegal immigrants out. Good thing fanatical groups are often at odds with each other and cant organize. Your god help us if they do...
Is he trolling? OK, see yah later!
Blar.