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."

Comments

I never expected to see anything from book 6

[Megor1]

Book 6 (Second half of ROTK) would be difficult for the movie, as it's after the climax. I will be very happy to see that part covered a bit more in the extended edition DVD.

Re:I never expected to see anything from book 6

[Alienation Capitalis]

The problem with these movies is that while they do a good job of captuing all the action and adventure of the books, they have sacrificed the greater underlying epic themes. This is the end of the third age, the Elves have finally decided to abandon the world they share with the other races. The greatest of the Elvish powers are destroyed with the one ring, and with that they loose their havens of Lothlorien and rivendell.

The greatness of the men of Numenor which was gained from association with the elves of the Blessed Relm (Noldor etc.) is fading, and Aragorn is just a distant echo of how great they were. Soon all in Middle Earth will loose its direct associations the Blessed Relm.

This massive change is underlying all that is going on, giving a bitter-sweet taste of loss to the story. The scouring of the Shire is central to this. The Hobbits must learn to stand without the protection of the Valor and those who undertake their works. Every thing Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin go through leads to this point. They return from death and fire with the maturity to save themselves without help from those wiser and greater.

To leave the scouring of the shire out of the movies, while logical from a film making standpoint (expecially given how the films have to the story to this point) is a tragic ommission, and really amplifies the sacrafices that have been made to the story in order to make the movies. While I personally enjoyed the movies I could not help but cringe when Aragorn behaves like a thug towards Frodo when meeting him, when Arwen replaces Glorfindel at the river, when Gandalf hugs Frodo or when Faramir takes Frodo out of his caves as a prisoner.

And what the hell were those elves doing at helm's Deep??

The BBC radio play does a much better job of telling the story. Check it out some time.

Re:I never expected to see anything from book 6

[drfireman]

It's easy to mistakenly believe that anyone who criticized a divergence from the books thinks movies (or at least these movies) should be literal translations of the original sources. I think that far more often, the criticism is simply that among the enormous numer of translation decisions the filmmaker has to make, one or two were errors. I have zero knowledge of filmmaking, but it only takes a miniscule bit of common sense to appreciate that books can't generally be made into films by 1:1 translation.

I think Peter Jackson overall has exhibited a mind bogglingly deft touch in adapting material to which many people feel very close. But legitimate criticism is possible, even if there's no obvious way to solve certain problems. It's hard to believe Jackson doesn't himself have some reservations about the various cuts of the films. But you can't tinker forever, and you can't go back and work material into movies that have already been released.

In this case, I suspect if he could go back and adjust things a bit, he'd find a way to squeeze the confrontation scene into the second movie, at least into the extended version. It has a worthwhile dramatic impact in the book, and it can be included while still omitting the later shire scenes. It facilitates a potentially very cinematic scene later with the palantir, and gives both Lee and Dourif more screen time. Functionally, it brings Saruman's role in the movie to what feels to me like a more decisive (or at least more personal) end. I can imagine places for cuts, too, but that's another discussion.

Saruman who, again? :)

[isomeme]

I think this stinks, too, but I can see where it might make sense to drop Saruman for this movie if the only other choice was to drop something else. After all, once his army is defeated at Helm's Deep and his factories are trashed by the Ents, he's pretty much out of the picture as a major player in the war. Resolution (as Tolkien wrote it) would be nice, but I can't say this is an especially heinous cut.

Re:Key component?

[mcb]

The scouring of the shire isn't included in the movie at all. Bad choice in my opinion, it drives home the theme that no one and nothing is untouched by war (a lesson some americans need to learn).

I don't know about you but...

[Codifex Maximus]

I want them to do The Hobbit too. I can't see them passing up the opportunity! It's a ringer!

And yes, I agree, Lee is a great Saruman.

DVD conspiracy...

[HonkyLips]

I know this is Slashdot but the conspiracy theories about selling more DVDs are bullshit. Peter Jackson has nothing to gain from crippling his movie so that MAYBE more DVDs are sold. I doubt he sees any additional income based on DVD sales. As a professional editor I find his explanation of the way the Saruman scenes impact the narrative and structure of the 3rd film to make complete sense. As he says - Sauron is now the villain, not Saruman. Films of books are often worse than the books because they are different mediums with different requirments. In order for ROTK to be a great film - and probably the best 3rd in a series ever (no ewoks) - it's only reasonable that the Director makes sacrifices in terms of the original books to ensure the film is as good as it can be. Peter Jackson is not crippling his film in order to sell DVDs. He has nothing to gain and everything to lose. He is simply demonstrating his understanding of the feature film medium by adapting the original narrative for the screen. HonkyLips.

Re:WTF!

[Alien54]

Tom Bombadil Good riddance. Most annoying chapter(s) in the whole series...

perhaps you may have misread the chapter. see this easy: which looks to answer the question, "Who Is Tom Bombadil?"

snippet:

If Tom is Aule, however, there is a moral dimension, indeed, a heightened one, for Tom's appearance in the story, although only a "comment," serves as a sharp and clear contrast to the two evil Maiar, Sauron and Saruman, both of whom were once his servants before turning to evil and darkness. Unlike their former master, these two followed the ways of Melkor, envy, jealousy, excessive pride, and the desire to possess and control.

Tolkien seems to have created a very complete universe, many bits of which have a history which is not immediately obvious, and which may profit from re-reading after a few years.

Re:What would they have done with him anyhow?

[willtsmith]

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?

Everything I've soon so far indicates that these men have the utmost respect for each other.

Beyond that, the wraiths really can't see the Ring persee. They are aware of it's general location. They are certainly aware of the ring when someone uses it. They absoluetly can see who is using it.

Remember the scene where the hobbits hide underneath the road. If the wraiths could absoluetly "see" the ring, then the jig would have been up. This was not an invention of Peter Jackson, it's in the book as well.

Beyond that, the Ring-Wraiths seen to go into "general" mode after they are vanquished in Rivendell. Sauron knows that everybody is out for the ring. When it is used, he is absoluetly aware of it's location. Sauron would also be aware that no one but him (and perhaps Saruman and Gandalf) could wield it.

After they lose track of the ring at Rivendell, the wraiths stop looking. They are set to other tasks dealing with the war. The only reason he sent the wraiths out in the first place is that Golumn told him where the ring was. The ring seeks out Sauron by it's nature.

In the books Gandalf talks about Sauron's great weakness. He assumes that the ring-bearer will use the ring. By using the ring, they will either reveal themselves or become slaves to the rings power (like the wraiths). The ring itself is a disembodied version of Sauron.

Had any mortal man used the ring (especially Aragorn), they would have come under Sauron's power. Sauron's great fault was he did not consider that they would try to DESTROY the ring. Nor did Sauron believe that anyone could resist it's call (as the halflings can for a time).

Remember how the Ring betrayed Isiodor. That was while Sauron was at his very weakest. Imagine how the ring would affect a human when Sauron was at the height of his power???? The ring would not serve a man, it would only betray him to Sauron.

So you see, Frodo making a token gesture to a ring wraith makes no difference. From visual appearance, they can't tell the difference between the one ring and a wedding band. Had Frodo really wanted to turn over the ring, he would have put it on. Then they would have been on him like a flies on shit.

Storyline discussions

[jdifool]

Hi,

the fact that Saruman has been cut is not a huge problem in itself, indeed. It worries me for the palantir which, I hope, will not fall from the golden sky.

But actually this questions the whole process involved in making the trilogy. I am a die-hard fan, and I liked the Felllowship and the Two Towers.

I found that Jackson added too much scenes, that, if they were designed to make the story more understandable and/or the characters cooler, proved to be useless. Let's consider it : first you have the Rohirrim knights slaughtering the Orcs that took away Merry and Pippin. If my memory is ok, I think that Tolkien gives it 4 lines. Jackson, on the other hand gives it at least 5 minutes. Second, we have the destruction of a Rohirrim village ; actually the tale of the little boy who has to leave his mother and then become a warrior to avenge her etc. is, say, sad (/?) but stupid. It takes 5 minutes (Go ! Go! my son Go!). Aragorn wounded after the battle against the vile goat-dog-dragon, saved by his horse, fainting in the setting sun. The death of the fat elven guy at the end, who has no importance but that of being the character that dies at the end. I'm sure I omitted some others, but let's say that it took something like 15-20 minutes. It is *plenty* of time to put other things instead.

Nevertheless I liked the Two Towers. But less than the first one, for there was some very strong misunderstandings between the book and the movie.

- Who *ever* said that Saruman was the vilain ? (I base my comment on the fact that Jackson said that in the ROTK, Sauron was now the vilain) Again if my memory is ok, it is always said, mainly by Gandalf, that Saruman is a pet in the Dark Lord's hands. That Saruman's armies are strenghten by His spirit. Well, in my opinion, it was a complete mistake to present Saruman as the first enemy ; Sauron then seems to be a challengeable partner. We shouldn't forget that he is one of the God's servants.

-Who *ever* said that Gimli was a fucking asshole ? Who *ever* wrote that dwarves needed to be thrown ? This completely kills the Gimli character, and frankly, this is a shame. It relies on the very intuitive human cliche of the fantasy world, in which humans are warriors, elves are archers and clever, and dwarves are axemen and quite stupid beared creatures. I think Tolkien showed that he had much more sharpness in its way of considering the *main* character, and that it could have been underlined in the movie.

For the Lord of the Rings (book) does not cater to intellectuals, and there was absolutely NO need to put some attractive but all the more boring sequences (I've seen the trailer of ROTK, and I was frightened by the scene between crying Eowyn and Aragorn : "No Eowyn, you're never going to see a king's dick").

Cutting was Ok, but adding and shifting the overall sense of the story : no good.

Regards,
Jdif

Sauruman's defeat in TT was not shown

[DunbarTheInept]

I can understand that if you leave out the scouring of the shire, then you also cut out Saruman's part entirely from Return of the King, and that there wasn't time to cover that part. What bothers me about this more is that you never really see that Saruman is defeated in the TT movie (although I haven't seen the extended release of TT yet, so maybe it was in there) After Isengard is flooded and Ent'ed to smithereens, there's still the part where the group parleys with Saruman (and the audience learns of his smoothtalking skills, and, more importantly plot wise, the palantir is dropped and Sauron sees "a hobbit" in it, and is thusly decieved about the ring's whereabouts. It's the cutting of THIS instance of Sauruman that I am most annoyed at. It shows that he is truly defeated, even if they do leave him stuck locked up in the tower and can't get to him - and it would have been a chance to hear Christopher Lee play the smooth-talking "reasonable" evil guy, which would have really rocked.

At the end if TT, I just assumed that the reason we hadn't seen that part yet was the same reason we didn't see Shelob - it was pushed forward into the third movie. Now that I see it won't be, I'm a bit confused by Peter Jackson's decision (as confused as I was by his addition of Faramir taking a long time to change his mind and let Frodo go, dragging him all the way to Osgiloth in the process - That didn't add anything to the story and there's no reason to ADD material to the story when it's already impossible to fit everything in and stuff is being cut all over the place. Those were valuable minutes of footage to fit under the 3 hour cap - minutes that could have been spent on something plot related, like the cut Saruman scenes.