The worst deviation from the books?

United States
January 6, 2007 6:17pm CST
What change or omission by Peter Jackson peeved you the most?
1 person likes this
5 responses
@Debargha (19)
• India
11 Jan 07
Personally I feel the omission of Aragorn's mental battle with Sauron in the Palantir was a great miss. According to what I have heard, Peter Jackson went halfway through that scene but decided to drop it in the last moment. I feel its a crucial moment as far as the story is concerned.
• India
12 Jan 07
I guess you are mentioning that scene when Aragorn 'dreams' about Arwen dying... the jewel (the light of the evenstar) that Arwen presented him falling from his grip and shattering on the ground? Well that is not exactly Aragorn's battle with Sauron through the palantir. In fact this portion is not mentioned in the book at all. Do you agree with me?
• India
21 Jan 07
There was no Rising of the Shire in Return of The King!!! Actually i feel this was the most important part as Frodo and his friends fight off Saruman without help from wizards, elves, dwarves or humans and it also shows the suffering of Frodo from his wound in the shoulder
@shogunly (1397)
• Libya
11 Feb 07
In the original story , Aragorn refused to enter the city before a certain ceremony , this is important in my opinion ,it represents Aragorn coming into his own .Also ,the prophecy that" A King's hand are healing hands " was never mentioned , it is one of the signs of Aragorn's true descendence .
• United States
7 Jan 07
Honestly nothing really. Except maybe Tom Dumadel or whatever his name was. Or more about the trees. I think everything he kept out he kept out because of time. The movies are long as they are now. I couldn't imagine all the extra stuff he kept out unless he made each two parts. I think Peter did a great job because he is such a fan of the books. Interesting topic and I'll keep looking for other peoples responses. Just in case I forgot about something.
• United States
7 Jan 07
The omission of the Old Forest, Tom Bombadil, and the Barrow Wights didn't bother me that much either, because if you look at the plotline linearly, that whole sidestory is a linear "hiccup". It did nothing to advance the plot and in the outside world nothing progressed either - the Nazgul couldn't sense the Ring and probably just established a perimeter patrol in the zone where the Ring dropped off their "radar" and up to a day's walk in any direction. This situation could have been kept up indefinitely, or until the hobbits left Bombadil's protection. So I agree - it is probably one omission that made sense across the board - altho an old purist like myself would liked to have seen it anyway.
1 person likes this
• India
21 Jan 07
There was no Rising of the Shire in Return of The King!!! Actually i feel this was the most important part as Frodo and his friends fight off Saruman without help from wizards, elves, dwarves or humans and it also shows the suffering of Frodo from his wound in the shoulder
@Myrrdin (3599)
• Canada
2 Feb 07
I tend to agree, The Rising of the Shire is one of my favorite chapters from ROTK, I hated to see it cut. I disliked that they cut Bombadil out, but I understood, however like you I feel that the Rising of the Shire is very important to the tale.
• United States
11 Feb 07
The worst one was the whole romance thing between Arwen and Aragorn, plus giving her scenes that didn't even exist. I guess they had to have some love interest, but Arwen never even appeared until the last volume. If they had left all that out, they could have included the scouring of the shire, and wouldn't have had to kill Saruman off so early.