I agree with what seems to be the marjority here. Namely, that in the books Theoden isn't <I>possesed</I> by Saruman the way he is in the movie - but it was an OK move for PJ to portray it that way. It made it possible to leave out explanations (always difficult to have in movies) & made it easier for the marjority of the audience (non Tolkien knowers) to follow the story.<P>The essence is that Saruman somehow manipulates Theoden into being passive when Saruman tries to overtake Rohan - the fact that that manipulation is shown a bit differently from book to movie is not that big a deal IMO.
|