Peter Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" Mistake

Lord of the Rings is one of the biggest, best movie series ever created. Director Peter Jackson did a masterful job in many respects. One of the most important elements of the movies is the fact that Jackson stayed pretty true to J.R.R. Tolkien's books. With the huge fan base the stories had even before the Lord of the Rings movies, it was important to do so. Even though the events and dialogue have some changes to them in the movies, they are for the most part unimportant or perhaps even more illustrative of the character or situation. But one event stands out that is enough to ruin the third in the Lord of the Rings series of films, The Return of the King.

Some of Jackson's changes to Lord of the Rings are necessary because of the tremendous amount of material he was trying to fit into a movie timeframe and to illustrate an issue he couldn't portray in another way. For instance, in the fight on Weathertop, when Frodo is confronted by the Nazgul, he backs away and cowers from them. In the book, Frodo leaps forward to attack, yelling, "O Elbereth!" While this exchange changes Frodo's character a bit, making him less courageous, it also shows how fearful the Nazgul are, especially to the ring-bearer. As for missing material, there are a number of fight scenes, such as that of the fellowship party against some orcs before they enter Lothlorien the first time, that occur in the book but not the movie. Leaving out such incidents helps keep the movie at a manageable time and doesn't really detract from the story. Although some people view them as mistakes, they are necessary changes.

Other omissions from Lord of the Rings are more significant. Some fans were terribly upset at the loss of Tom Bombadil from Jackson's movie and consider his exclusion a major mistake by Jackson. While he was a fun character and many of the events surrounding the hobbits' visit to him were significant for expressing the innocents of the hobbits, he doesn't advance the main storyline. Jackson's omission makes sense; Tom Bombadil would have been nice to see but is not a mistake in omitting.

Others bemoan the expansion of Arwen's role, particularly at the Ford in Fellowship as the hobbits attempt to escape the Nazgul. The fact that Arwen rescues Frodo at this juncture in the film is quite different from the scene in the book, where Frodo raises his sword and challenges the Nazgul to cross the river. Here again, Frodo is robbed of an opportunity to show his true courageous nature, to show why he would volunteer to take the ring to its doom. But again, his colors are shown at other times, and letting Arwen appear more of a fighter doesn't really affect the important elements of her character so really shouldn't be considered a mistake.

The big mistake, however, occurs in The Return of the King, at one of its most climactic moments. Frodo and Sam have finally reached Mt. Doom and are approaching the end of their journey. Gollum is still there, waiting his opportunity to take back the ring, and his hatred for Sam boils over in the movie, leading him to frame Sam for eating the last of their food. The movie depicts Frodo sending Sam away, and Sam, sobbing, heading down the mountain. Eventually, he finds the evidence of Gollum's deception and returns to the crack in Mt. Doom in time to see Frodo and Gollum struggle over the ring.

In both the book and the movie, Sam endures the horrible conditions, the worst of which to him is Frodo's worsening state. Sam agonizes over how to help Frodo, often going without food and water himself, letting Frodo sleep as he stands watch, making sure Frodo takes nourishment, and even offering to carry the ring. The book depicts Sam refusing to leave Frodo's side after the capture by Shelob, even though Sam believes Frodo to be dead, until Sam realizes he must carry on the mission to destroy the ring. Sam risks his own life a number of times to save Frodo. And after the ring is gone, Sam waits by Frodo's bedside until Gandalf shoos him away for a few moments.

This same guy left Frodo at the top of the mountain with Gollum? No matter what was happening, Sam would never have left Frodo. Sam went on the journey to protect Frodo, and while he would have been upset about Frodo's attempt to send him away, he never would have let Frodo get out of eyesight. It is just unreasonable, and his going down the mountain in the movie is totally out of character for himself and the relationship between him and Frodo.

When books become movies, changes are inevitable, and sometimes they may even be helpful. But changes that illustrate an abrupt change in character that is not supported in any context are mistakes. And such a change to a well-loved classic like Lord of the Rings, especially when there is no reason for it, is unforgivable. So some of us watch the first two movies in Jackson's series and leave The Return of the King, the true ending of the ring, to the beautiful story painted by Tolkien.