Ring driven or Meat Driven?

[Kitanna]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

I can't accept that Glirdan. They may have 'made up' for that by having Pippin outsmart Treebeard, but doesn't that beg an equally poignant question? Being, why was Treebeard so wishy-washy?

Well, that's three characters I'm moaning about now. Sorry!

I agree. I would rather have had Treebeard as he was in the book then having Pippin smart. The Ents shouldn't have been so hesitate when it came to going to war in the movie.

[Glirdan]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

I can't accept that Glirdan. They may have 'made up' for that by having Pippin outsmart Treebeard, but doesn't that beg an equally poignant question? Being, why was Treebeard so wishy-washy?

Well, that's three characters I'm moaning about now. Sorry!

It's quite alright. We're all entitled to our own opinions. Yet now I would have to agree with you Eomer and Kitanna. I would have rathered the Ents as they were in the book over Pippin outsmating one of the oldest beings of all of Middle Earth. It would have been better if they just went by how Grishnahk and Pippin acted in the books.

[CaptainofDespair]

Originally Posted by Glirdan

It's quite alright. We're all entitled to our own opinions. Yet now I would have to agree with you Eomer and Kitanna. I would have rathered the Ents as they were in the book over Pippin outsmating one of the oldest beings of all of Middle Earth. It would have been better if they just went by how Grishnahk and Pippin acted in the books.

In that case, they should have just made the movies exactly like the books.

I'd prefer Clever Grish, but I can see why a Hungry Grish would be better for a mass-audience movie. I'd also prefer Book Treebeard over Movie, but again...it's for that accursed audience.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

I agree, CoD, that movie-Grishnákh was suited to the movie-audience. However, I can't see how movie-Treebeard was more suited. But that's a whole new topic (of which I lay claim to ).

The popcorn-munchers enjoy their hungry bloodthirsty monsters. That's why they made Grishnákh into a slobbering beast, rather than a tricksy fiend. That and time constraints. They were probably able to chop off a couple of minutes by doing this. But then, the extended edition...

[Lily Bombadil]

Boromir88, but if we've read the books, we knew Pippin didn't have the Ring. If they'd put Grishnak's Ring-driven-ness in the movie, it still would've built up the suspense of wondering what would happen to Merry and Pippin. I personally would like to have seen Grishnak portrayed by the book. It definitely would've been nice to see more Tolkien and more cleverness in the movie. But then I guess PJ's chased-through-the-woods thing would've been out? I can't really say. Sometimes the things PJ does, brilliant though he is, end in utter stupidity and disaster... Gotta love PJ...

[Bergil]

The actor who played Grishnakh would, I think, have done the ring-driven version of the scese well (in fact, I hear that version done by the movie actors when I read that scene in the book)
And, the book-version requires that Eomer use his un-stupid strategy, rather then rushing in blindly.

but when you watch the film, the film version is entertaining.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Also, the Uruks would have been very aware of the Rohirrim well before they were attacked by them.

It's a bit like the scene where we first see the Riders seconds after 'Gorn, Legolas and Gimli hide from them. Really, they're about four yards away from you: could you not see them?