Quote:
|
Overall, a very frustrating deviation by PJ from the wonderful JRRT!
|
My thoughts precisely. In fact most of the major deviations look to me like the sort of misrepresentations that one might expect from inept fan-fiction, in which what the writer wishes had happened is played out in place of Tolkien's invariably subtler approach. For strangers to come with arrogant force into a king's hall and fight his trusted house-carles before his very throne undermines his authority and alienates the loyal members of his household at a time when his authority is already at a low ebb. In the scenes in Rohan, Théoden is cast almost in the role of a vassal king. This is not how Tolkien envisaged him, and it is certainly not how Aragorn saw him, particularly since Aragorn holds no official title at the time when these events take place.
Moreover, Aragorn's deference to Théoden in the book underlines both his humility and his respect for Rohan as an independent kingdom (which incidentally offers a stark contrast to Denethor's haughty dismissal of other peoples). Although not yet a king, he is laying the foundations of diplomacy and making it easier for Théoden to accept his status. This purpose would not be served by barging into Meduseld, shouting the odds and overruling the king in front of his thegns. This is just awful diplomacy and it would set up severe problems for the future, but it is also completely out of character for Aragorn, who is Tolkien's model of a good king. In joining in this farce, Gandalf can only appear as a meddler and a usurper of authority, so he, too, is undermined as a character. As for the scene in which Gríma is kicked out of Meduseld: it misses the entire point of his departure in the books, which shows him to be a traitor and coward and Théoden, Éomer, Aragorn
et al to be noble and merciful. This scene was a sop to the writers' desire to see 'justice' (read punishment) done, and it lessens everyone involved apart from Gríma himself. The scene as written by Tolkien has Wormtongue
choosing exile over redemption and loyalty, which increases the bitterness of his later suffering in Saruman's presence. Of course, we know now that we are not to see this in the next film, but since it was an important theme in the books, and will probably be replaced with more gratuitous fighting scenes, this is yet another example of clumsy adaptation.
I'm afraid that I can never accept the explanation that all of these changes were necessary. Too many of them seem to exhibit an arrogant belief that the script-writers are better at characterisation and storytelling than the man who wrote the story that they are adapting. Even if this were true, the aim of an adaptation is to capture the spirit of the story in a different medium, not to adapt the themes and spirit to suit what the writers would rather they had been. Where the changes made are clearly imposed by want of space I have no objections (although if space is at such a premium then writing new scenes and extending minor battles into huge set-pieces is even more deplorable), but this is not why the scenes in Rohan were re-written. If the authors of the screenplay really were better storytellers than Tolkien I might still be able to forgive their butchery, but clearly they are not. Therefore they only lessen the impact of their material, whilst simultaneously revealing their own lack of understanding.