The One Ring |
The Complete List of Film Changes
"Sure, it's not really THE LORD OF THE RINGS ... but it could still be a pretty damn cool movie. " -- Peter Jackson
The Changes
The Complete List of Film Changes is actually comprised of several lists, which you may get to by clicking on the following links:
General Changes
The Fellowship of the Ring
The Two Towers
Return of the King
What is a Change?
The Complete List of Film Changes is my ongoing project to list all the reported differences between Peter Jackson's upcoming Lord of the Rings films and the J.R.R. Tolkien books upon which they are based. I am attempting to document each difference, regardless of whether I personally consider them to be good or bad, major or trivial.
In compiling The List, I decided to apply a very broad definition to the word "change," for one of my goals is to pass along to other Tolkien fans what I have learned about the upcoming films. I include not only alterations to the books' plot, but also book scenes that are not included in the films as well as new scenes written by the film-makers. I also consider plot elements that are shown in a different manner or sequence than they are in the books.
However, I have decided not to list Peter Jackson's interpretation on issues that Tolkien is unclear about: whether Balrogs have wings, the color of Legolas' hair, whether Elves have pointed ears, and other issues that fans argue about ad infinitum.
Explanation of Terms
Each change is described as follows:
FILMS: The change that is reportedly depicted in the films.
BOOKS: How the books differ from what is depicted in the films.
PRO: The rationale behind the change, based upon explanations given by cast or crew members, or theories suggested by myself and other fans.
CON: Arguments against the change, made by myself or other fans who have found problems associated with the change.
SUPPORTED BY: Links to sources that reported, confirmed, or provided detailed information about the change.
REFUTED BY: Links to other sources that contradict the change.
CREDIBILITY: A scale of 0-5, where 0 indicates an unsubstantiated rumor and 5 indicates photographic evidence backed up by independent confirmation. I assign initial ratings based upon the most credible source as follows:
0: Anonymous source of unknown credibility, film merchandise.
1: Anonymous source appearing to be familiar with production details (for example, TORN's Galadriel, Tolkien-Movies' Leonides, Tolkien Online's Jersey), casting audition scripts.
2: reporter or other authorized visitor to the set (for example, E! Online's John Forde); review of the (now-obsolete) 2-film version of the scripts.
3: Cast or crewmember; interview with Peter Jackson PRIOR TO FILMING
4: Trailer or other photographic evidence; interview with Peter Jackson AFTER FILMING; review of completed film.
I then add one to the rating if there is more then one source.
Finally, if any sources REFUTE the change, then I subtract a number derived by applying the same formula to the REFUTED BY sources as I do to the SUPPORTED BY sources. If the CREDIBILITY rating is negative, then I list the change in the DEBUNKED RUMORS section.
NOTE: Even the highest credibility rating does not guarantee that the change will actually make it into the final film. Films are subject to revision through editing and re-filming almost up until the release date.
How This List Came to be Written
As an avid Tolkien fan for over thirty years, I was very excited when I learned that Peter Jackson was filming a live-action adaptation of The Lord of the Rings. I read every news item about this project I could find on the Internet and maintained a set of links to especially informative news articles and Tolkien web sites having information about the films.
As I participated in message board discussions about Jackson's adaptation, I would occasionally come across fans debating some rumored change that I had yet to read about. When I followed up on the rumor by checking my news sources, I sometimes discovered that the rumor had no basis in fact. It occurred to me that with so much about this adaptation to debate, fans should confine their discussions to changes that had actually been reported. So, I began compiling a list of all the reported differences between the films and the books to provide fellow Tolkien fans a more accurate set of boundaries for debating Peter Jackson's adaptation of Tolkien's works.
A Word from The Wise
Ian McKellen wrote the following in McKellen E-Post 10/3/00:
"Lord of the Rings is perhaps the most faithful screenplay ever adapted from a long novel. This is not just because our writing quartet is devoted to the original and would share other fans' resentment if it were"mistreated". Tolkien has an advantage over Dickens, Tolstoy and other epic writers. His storylines have a clear sweep and are less concerned with the byways and subplots which characterise 19th century novels. Consequently the major milestones of the Fellowship's journey are intact. Inevitably, even in a three-film version, there will be some omissions of characters and elisions of events but as the story unfolds onscreen and as the landscapes are seen for the first time, little will be missed.
"The enthusiasts who have read the novels over and over may notice every change but in doing so they will miss the point. Peter Jackson's movie does not challenge the novel's supremacy any more than the distinguished book illustrations by Howe, Lee et al were meant to replace Tolkien's descriptive words. Paintings, drawings, animations and at last the feature films all augment our appreciation of Lord of the Rings. And just watch the book sales rise as New Line's publicity for the film gears up.
"Another point on this, the question that dominates my email: the adaptation of masterpieces from one medium to another is as old as literature. Most of Shakespeare's plays are re-workings of stories, poems or written history. When I moved Richard III from stage to screen, I was determined to make a good film in honour of a great play. Had I left every scene and line of the text intact in the movie, it would not have been a good one. Kurosawa's Throne of Blood, my favourite version of the Macbeth saga, distorts Shakespeare to spectacular effect. The play which inspired it remains intact."
Final Words
My thanks go to the many Tolkien fans who have discussed these changes on this and other websites. Through their message board debates I have learned much about literature, cinema, and the intricacies of J.R.R. Tolkien's Middle-earth.
I am especially grateful to Jonathan and Ted of The One Ring for agreeing to host my project on their fantastic website.
AncalagonTheBlack
General Changes
The Fellowship of the Ring
The Two Towers
Return of the King