Age change in Théoden

[Sauron the White]

from MatthewM

Why do you suppose Jackson made King Théoden (and in turn his son Théodred) appear about 20-30 years younger than Tolkien described him in the book?

With all due respect Matt, it looks like it took you over five years to figure that one out so its obviously not a huge issue that prevented the films from being a success. Where does it say that the actor portraying Theoden has to be the same age as the character listed in the book? They were both older men. A movie and a book are two very different things.

So much of this is nitpicking at its worse. The more I read this type of stuff I want to see a SNL sketch like the ones they used to do about Trekkies at a a Star trek convention.

Cut to Saturday Night Live at a LORD OF THE THINGS convention:

"YEAH!!!! And what about all the errors in those stupid movies that were a disgrace to the memory of the sainted author"

" Yeah. Heres one. Booie Blahblah is actually 5 foot 9 inches tall in the book and the actor in that stupid movie is actuall 5 foot 10 inches!!!! Whats with that????"

"Thats nothing. Foeey Nannie is actually left-handed in the book but the stupid actor Hackson hired uses their right hand to do nearly everything!!!! Whats up with that????"

"I read in the Encyclopedia of THINGS that The Grand Poobah sits on a black throne made of petrified whale organs in the books but in that stupid movie the throne is dark brown and made of wood??? Whats up with that?????"

"Gosh thats lame. I looked in my three volume Atlas of the World of THINGS and found out that The kingdom of Spetem is suppose to be in the lower half of the hemisphere and rather warm but in one scene you can see the breath of one of the terrible actors!!!!! Whats up with that?????"

"That makes me sick. How about in the banquet scene at the Glittering Hall of Wrobel and you can clearly see that there are green peppers on the table!!! Green Peppers of all things!!!! I went home and checked the August 1984 issue of Amen Hun and there was an article by Dr. Verne Klemper who wrote about the botany of Wrobel. He never listed green peppers as one of the things you could grow there. How stupid are these people who write these films? How come they did not do any research to get it right?"

And so it goes on.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

StW, now you're getting insulting. This debate has never been about geek-trivia and you know it. I couldn't give a rodent's patootie whether somebody's hair color is 'correct'.

The issue (or one of many issues) is meddling with characters, and it's an essential aspect of Theoden's personality in his last weeks that he be elderly. His spirit is willing, but his flesh weak: something that PBW got precisely backwards. His feats on the Pelennor are supposed to be *amazing* to the reader/audience, given his geriatricity.

(Besides, you don't have to cast an elderly actor to play an old man!)

[Sauron the White]

There is a great line from the film MY BLUE HEAVEN. Steve Martin says "everybody thinks they have a sense of humor but they don't."

No insult intended. If we cannot smile at our own foibles, we are taking ourselves too seriously.

and WCH - why would you use a word like insult to unfairly and wrongly characterize my humorous post and then you yourself use a negative insulting term like GEEK? Perhaps I hit rather close to the mark... or too close for you?

[Elladan and Elrohir]

Why not just take the question at face value and try to sincerely answer it? There's no need to launch into ad hominem and straw man. The guy doesn't like the movies as much as you and I do; give him a fair shake anyway and discuss his question.

It's a good question, and one that I haven't seen asked much at all. I think there was definitely an urge to play younger and give Theoden a more active role. It allows him to swing sword at Grima, power-walk the length and breadth of Helm's Deep before the battle, and go get wounded while impaling Uruk-Hai at the gate.

Of course, it also makes it more credible for Theoden to be Eowyn and Eomer's uncle; it arguably (I said ARGUABLY, mind you!) allows him to relate to Eowyn better.

And thematically, it doesn't allow Theoden to focus on his age and how that might hinder him; instead he concerns himself with boosting morale and strengthening his people.

None of those reasons are airtight by any means and all can be criticized, but those are a few that occurred to me.

[Gwathagor]

I think it's important to Theoden's character for him to be an old fella. It makes his situation (as an apparently weak king, the last of his line) more pathetic and desperate, his courage more dramatic, and his ultimate redemption through glorious death in battle all the more important.

[A Little Green]

I agree that in Théoden's character, the age is an important issue, and thus find it odd that it should be changed. What would have happened, I wonder, if they had decided for instance to make Éomer middle-aged? (Ok, a lousy example, but who cares.)

I guess the reason had to do with making him look different than the other old greybeards in the film. However, I do NOT find that a valid reason for changing his age.

Indeed, now that I think about it, it can't have been about the actor doing the role. Bernard Hill was, after all, around 60 years old when the films were released (if I have it correctly), so I can't imagine the filmmakers having any difficulties, had they wished to do so, in making him look older.

By the way,

Originally Posted by William Cloud Hickli

His spirit is willing, but his flesh weak: something that PBW got precisely backwards.

sorry to ask silly questions but what is PBW? It might be my brain just won't work right now, or else I'm just not learned enough.

[William Cloud Hicklin]

Sorry- shorthand for Peter-Boyens-Walsh.

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

With all due respect Matt, it looks like it took you over five years to figure that one out so its obviously not a huge issue that prevented the films from being a success.

With due respect to the board, I will not say the word that I would love to say right now, directly to you, "Sauron the White" (that makes sense, BTW...) Rest assured it would be insulting. Anyway, NO, it did not take me over five years to figure that one out, so how about you stop jumping to conclusions. I have been well aware of the fact that Théoden's age was changed.

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Where does it say that the actor portraying Theoden has to be the same age as the character listed in the book? They were both older men. A movie and a book are two very different things.

And where does it say that the actor should not be portrayed like he was in the books? A movie and a book- two different things? Oh my, shock shock!

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

So much of this is nitpicking at its worse. The more I read this type of stuff I want to see a SNL sketch like the ones they used to do about Trekkies at a a Star trek convention.

I did not see anything comical about your post. In fact, I believe it was corny at its best.

And to clear things up - I think Bernard Hill did a brilliant job as Théoden. I wasn't commenting on his portrayal only his outward appearance which I do not have much of a problem with, only a little one - and I was wondering if anybody thought the same or had something interesting to say.

Originally Posted by Elladan and Elrohir

Why not just take the question at face value and try to sincerely answer it? There's no need to launch into ad hominem and straw man. The guy doesn't like the movies as much as you and I do; give him a fair shake anyway and discuss his question.

Agreed. However you have it wrong - I do love the movies, they are my favorite films of all time. I just have problems with a lot of changes that PJ made. People who sleep with the films such as Sauron the White seems to do could tell me until they are blue in the face the reason for the changes made, but I do not buy most of them.

[Sauron the White]

from MatthewM

With due respect to the board, I will not say the word that I would love to say right now, directly to you, "Sauron the White" (that makes sense, BTW...) Rest assured it would be insulting. Anyway, NO, it did not take me over five years to figure that one out, so how about you stop jumping to conclusions. I have been well aware of the fact that Théoden's age was changed.

If you have something to say, please, get it off your chest, step up to the mic and say it loud and proud. I am not a child and can take it. Just so nobody jumps to any conclusions, please provide me with a link to where you brought this up five years ago so we can put that charge to rest and move on.

And where does it say that the actor should not be portrayed like he was in the books?

Perhaps you are inexperienced or very young and do not know how these things work so allow me to help you acquire some basic understanding. You ask me to show you a negative..... something that does NOT happen. You will discover that one cannot prove a negative. In point of fact, and it has already been brought out here by others, Bernard Hill was an actor approaching sixty years old - fifty-eight to be exact. At the time of his death in the books, I believe Theoden was seventy-two. Both were indeed older men in the last section of thie lives. And Hill did portray an older man, enfeebled by Saruman, who was facing the challenges of his own doubts about his rule and place with his ancestors who he believed were superior to him.

I did not see anything comical about your post. In fact, I believe it was corny at its best

Thats okay . People often find it very difficult to laugh or even smile at themselves and their own foibles. You would not be the first to have that charteristic. Its okay.

People who sleep with the films such as Sauron the White seems to do could tell me until they are blue in the face the reason for the changes made, but I do not buy most of them.

I do not have to spend lengthy time telling you why the changes were made and certainly do not want to turn blue. Its obvious why the changes were made to anyone with an IQ above 75 --- a book and a film are two different things with different constructions, characteristics, demands and ways to tell a story. That should be obvious and a point which is made in mere seconds.

And I have never slept with the films. Not a very rewarding pasttime I would think.

The key question here regarding your post is a simple one: did the character of Theoden work effectively in the context of the film? You seem to feel it did since you describe the performance this way

I think Bernard Hill did a brilliant job as Théoden

And I stand firmly in agreement with your wise assessment.

I do love the movies, they are my favorite films of all time

And again, I stand firmly in agreement with that assessment as well.

I just have problems with a lot of changes that PJ made.

You would have to define your qualifying term "a lot" but I too have problems with some of the film changes as well. Jackson is not perfect, he makes mistakes causing his work to be flawed and not as strong as it otherwise could have been - in my opinion.

Overall however, the films are a spectacular achievement.

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

If you have something to say, please, get it off your chest, step up to the mic and say it loud and proud. I am not a child and can take it. Just so nobody jumps to any conclusions, please provide me with a link to where you brought this up five years ago so we can put that charge to rest and move on.

I said what I needed to say. However, what I meant there was that - I do not think vulgarity would be welcome at the Downs. Vulgarity it would be. I am sure you are not alien to such a thing, acting like you do, correct?

Perhaps you are inexperienced or very young and do not know how these things work so allow me to help you acquire some basic understanding. You ask me to show you a negative..... something that does NOT happen. You will discover that one cannot prove a negative. In point of fact, and it has already been brought out here by others, Bernard Hill was an actor approaching sixty years old - fifty-eight to be exact. At the time of his death in the books, I believe Theoden was seventy-two. Both were indeed older men in the last section of thie lives. And Hill did portray an older man, enfeebled by Saruman, who was facing the challenges of his own doubts about his rule and place with his ancestors who he believed were superior to him.

Pray tell what you are trying to preach. They could have made Hill's hair grey and his beard longer. They chose not to - therefore, although he was old, he was not accurately portrayed appearance wise - I said nothing about character wise.

Thats okay . People often find it very difficult to laugh or even smile at themselves and their own foibles. You would not be the first to have that charteristic. Its okay.

I simply find you a nuisance. There is nothing to laugh at - I proposed a question and expected members to post their thoughts - not preach on how good the movies are, like you always seem to do.

I do not have to spend lengthy time telling you why the changes were made and certainly do not want to turn blue. Its obvious why the changes were made to anyone with an IQ above 75 --- a book and a film are two different things with different constructions, characteristics, demands and ways to tell a story. That should be obvious and a point which is made in mere seconds.

Wow, good one. Again...shocker.

Overall however, the films are a spectacular achievement.

Who said that they weren't? Wow, again, off the subject.

[Sauron the White]

MatthewM ... my initial point to you was a very simple one. I said that your observation about the age of Theoden could not have been too damaging to the films success since it took you five years to come up with the point. You said I was mistaken, that it had not taken you five years. I then asked you very clearly

please provide me with a link to where you brought this up five years ago so we can put that charge to rest and move on.

Of course, you failed to produce this which confirms my original suspicion that this is something that just dawned on you and is not really a very serious problem with the films. After all, it sat there for five years.

I have no idea what you are alluding to about vulgarity. Why would you need to be vulgar when we are discussing something like this?

You claim that my repeated statement that a book is one thing while a film is quite another is something that you well know. In fact you say

Wow, good one. Again...shocker

Your attempt at some level of sarcasm fails because of one very damning fact. It was you, in your original post, who said

Why do you suppose Jackson made King Théoden (and in turn his son Théodred) appear about 20-30 years younger than Tolkien described him in the book?

It is you - MatthewM - who brought up the comparison on what the book says and what the movie shows and then casts negativity upon the movie because, in your opinion, the movie changed something.

If you know that books are one thing and films are another, why are you comparing two very different things?

And even now, in your very latest post, you still continue to do it even though you maintain that you know the difference:

They could have made Hill's hair grey and his beard longer. They chose not to - therefore, although he was old, he was not accurately portrayed appearance wise

Accurately portrayed????? By what standard of measurement are you judging accuracy? Obviously from the holding up of the book to the film. You claim you know the difference and attack me for constantly reminding people of it but you slip back into error even now.

Its interesting to note that your assesment of age difference was off by many years. Bernard Hill was 14 years younger than Theoden. Your high end estimate of 30 years difference was off by a factor of over 100%. Even though your comparison serves no point, you were not even correct in the factual assumption you made. Even that was incorrect.

As a personal aside to you, its sad that you could not notice my closing comments in my post to you since I was attempting to show you that there is common ground between us. I agreed with several of your statements and even went further agreeing that Jackson was not perfect and has flaws in his films.

I have never met you or talked to you or exchanged any mails with you. However, you do strike me as either a much younger person who has some insecurity problems or a person with some anger issues. You can post any way you decide to post. I would think a little less personal anger would go much further to making your point about salient issues.

[Gwathagor]

MatthewM: I, too, find StW a nuisance.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Gwathagor

MatthewM: I, too, find StW a nuisance.

I think you're being slightly unfair there - STW judges the quality of the movies based on how much money they've made & how many people know of them.

This is a valid approach - its fairly obvious that if you apply the same criteria in judging people you find that those who are rich & famous are in every way superior to those who are poor & unknown ...