Middle Earth, from the Novel to the Silver Screen - Research Paper Example

Middle Earth, from the Novel to the Silver Screen Movie adaptations from novels always come with many changes, which might make the movie more or less interesting than the novel. However, the fascinating perspective depends upon an individual’s taste although most viewers cite the adaptations to movies as more interesting than the novels. On the other hand, there are viewers who will indicate that the movie enhanced their understanding of the novel. Nonetheless, the perspective an individual takes depends on their preferences since movies are a visual medium and movie directors’ attempts in portraying written pieces, thoughts, and events might be challenging. In this regard, some readers of the novel might be disappointed after watching the movies. However, movie directors and producers are always at hand to explain to the viewers that the movies are adaptations, which may delete, add, or change some aspects of the novel in order to make the movie. Like all movie adaptations, the Lord of the Rings trilogy had to undergo different modifications in order for the movies to fit in the 2-3 hours period. In this case, the movies would have been longer than three hours if the directors followed every bit of the story while adopting the novel into the movie. Nonetheless, Peter Jackson, director of the Lord of the Rings trilogy manages to ensure that his adoption of Tolkien’s novel The Lord of the Ring: The Return of the King is successful through the way he manages to cut, add, and changed some parts of the novel in the adaptation. Case in point, Jackson deleted some of the scenes that could have been an anti-climax to the movie such as the scene involving the scouring of the shire and a number of poems. On the hand, he managed to add some scenes that were appealing to the audience since they included some romance and action. Conversely, Jackson managed to alter the timeline in the movie in order to compensate and include other modifications such as the shift of Saruman’s death at the beginning of the movie in order to enable the deletion of the scene including the scouring of the shire. Perhaps the biggest deletion by Jackson is the scene including the scouring of the shire. In line with this, Valente noted that Jackson’s deletion of this scene might have been due to his, and Tolkien’s love for nature and the Hobbits (36). Nonetheless, the deletion of this scene comes with an emotional appeal to a viewer since they are able to appreciate the fact that the Hobbits beautiful Shire remained intact since the movie might have depicted the destruction in a worse way than the book explained. Hence, the viewer does not go through a position whereby they witnessed the destruction of a beautiful environment that was well maintained by the Hobbits. In addition, Jackson manages to maintain the Hobbits simple way of life throughout the book, which appeals emotionally to the viewers. In this regard, the scouring of the shire in the movie would have come with destruction of a simple way of life. Nonetheless, Jackson did not want to destroy this calm and uncomplicated life since the viewers would not have identified with such an action and would not find the adaptation appealing. Conversely, the scene was long and would not have fitted within the period resulting due to the change in the media. To continue with the depiction of the simple life that the Hobbits lead, Jackson adds something new in the movie in a scene that involves Merry and Pippin, two of the four Hobbits while at the gate of the Isengard. In this regard, Merry told Pippin that he smoked a lot (“The Return of the King”). While this statement does not have any effect on the overall story told by the adaptation, Jackson continues to show the drinking and pipe smoking nature of the Hobbits (Valente 36). In effect, Jackson wanted to make a politically correct statement in the book since the Hobbits did not have any misgivings about smoking in line with the contemporary society. With the deletion of the scene involving the scouring of the shire, Jackson’s adaptation deletes, or gave, the evil Saruman and Wormtongue minimal roles in the movie. In line with this, Saruman’s main role was in the scene regarding the scouring of the shire, which implies that the deletion of this scene reduces the evil encounters of Saruman with the rest of the characters. Valente observed, “Jackson omits the damage wrought by Saruman’s minions in the shire” (36). In line with this, Jackson’s omission of this scene leads to a modification of Saruman's death whereby Wormtongue kills Saruman while the two are on top of Ortahnic talking to Gandalf, Theoden, and the Company (“The Return of the King”). This way, Jackson deletes the books latter parts that involve Saruman and Wormtongue in order for the adaptation to fit into the visual medium’s time frame. Before Saruman’s death, the movie adaptation added a part whereby Saruman attacks Gandalf with wizard’s powers. In the book, Saruman does not use his powers against the people who confronted him during this scene that Jackson added to his adaptation. Instead, the book indicated that Saruman used the power of his voice, and not the wizard’s power as the movie depicted, to lure the weak-minded soldiers into following his cause (Tolkien 1033). In line with this, the movie depicts Saruman as still having the powers that he had as a wizard although the book portrays his powers as diminishing with Gandalf’s powers increasing. In addition, Tolkien’s work included a display of the way that Saruman’s powers had reduced when he dismissed everyone, but Gandalf called him back (Tolkien 1079). It is evident that Saruman was once the most powerful wizard and the book depicts his powers as diminishing since he has to listen to Gandalf. However, the movie did not adapt this scene although the only instance that it depicts the dwindling powers of Saruman was during the incident whereby Saruman attacked Gandalf with fire with the latter unaffected by the fire (“The Return of the King”). This change helps the viewer identify the reducing powers of Saruman and the increasing powers of Gandalf as a wizard. Evidently, Jackson managed to portray the role of good always-overcoming evil by depicting Saruman as a wizard who still had powers, which were weaker than Gandalf’s powers. In effect, this works well with the contemporary viewers who value such stories of good always-overcoming evil. Jackson amplifies the role of Gollum throughout the movie, which makes the movie more interesting to the viewer than the book. While amplifying the role of the Gollum, Jackson wanted to depict to the viewers that every individual in the society played a pivotal role without whom the society would be incomplete. In the earlier parts of the book, Frodo had indicated that Gollum deserved death although Jackson amplifies the role of Gollum in the movie by making the audience feel pity when Frodo trusts Gollum more than he trusted Sam (Valente 38). In this case, Gollum managed to turn Frodo against Sam by throwing the lembas over a cliff in order to prove to Frodo that Sam did not want him to succeed with his mission. However, Gollum motif is to ensure that the two friends parted ways by depicting Sam as Frodo’s friend who was not loyal. In effect, Jackson gives the movie a humanly touch by advancing his emotional appeal of pity and effectively making the adaptation better than the novel. Valente observed, “The Lord of the Rings, original epic and cinematic translation both, tells us that no one is irrelevant or unworthy of compassion” (38). In order to achieve this, Jackson’s cinematic translation changes the books depiction of Frodo’s trust on Sam. In this case, it is evident that Frodo, from the book, trusted Sam more than he trusted Gollum and Jackson’s depiction of Frodo, as turning away from Sam, is proof that each person played an important role in society. In this case, Frodo trusted Gollum because he thought that Gollum was the only person who would lead Frodo to the ‘precious’ (“The Return of the King”). To some extent, Jackson made this modification to illustrate different approaches that humankind make changes on their approaches to life in order to succeed. On the hand, Jackson added a modern view about friendship, which identifies the importance of testing a friendship in order to identify whether the friendship was true and real. In line with the changes made by Jackson regarding Gollum’s role, Jackson removed the scene that involved Gollum’s visit to Shelob’s Lair before he leads Frodo and Sam into the lair. Perhaps Jackson deleted this scene in order to ensure that Sam’s role, as the attentive and distrustful of Gollum, did not suffer any negative impact from the viewer. In this regard, the viewer would have been left wondering how Sam failed to notice that Gollum had sneaked to visit their enemy (“The Return of the King”). In addition, it is important to point out that this part appeared in the second part of the book although Jackson modified it in order to add the emotional appeal of friendship and the important role of every person in the society. In this case, it would not have been possible to show the effect of Gollum on Frodo and Sam’s friendship if Jackson failed to include this part in this part of the trilogy. Finally, Jackson modifies some characters, which Tolkien continually portrays as heroes throughout the story, in order to add a more human psychological appeal to them with successful effects. The character that Jackson modifies most is that of Aragorn. In this case, it is evident that Aragorn was a superhero all through Tolkien’s novel as a king and a legend. However, Jackson portrays Aragorn as a human being who is emotional and did not have some of the characteristics that Tolkien depicted in his novel. Valente noted, “Jackson re-imagined him (Aragorn) as someone reluctant” who chose exile over heir to a kingdom (38). To further, emphasise the portrayal of Aragorn by Jackson as more human than a superhero, Aragorn sends Arwen away from his life while telling her that he could not offer her anything and that their romance was nothing less than a dream, which could not become real (“The Return of the King”). In this regard, Jackson failed to portray Aragorn as a super hero, which makes the movie take a humanly appeal. On the other hand, Aragorn leads the people of Gondor into paying their respects to the Hobbits by bowing down before them (“The Return of the King”). Conversely, Valente noted that Jackson portrayed Aragorn as ordinary rather than the superhero by Tolkien especially in the instance that he kissed Arwen, which was a modification by Jackson to add a humanly perspective on the movie. Briefly, it is evident that Jackson was able to turn a high fantasy of the 1950s gain the success in the contemporary society. In order to ensure the success, he had to make some alterations from the original text in order for the movie to fit into the visual medium and period. On the other hand, the contemporary society has changed from the society that liked the book by Tolkien in the 1950s. Hence, Jackson appeals to this society by giving the movie a humanly appeal when he highlights the most important aspects of human life such as pity, compassion, and the important role of each person in the society. In addition, the alteration of the characters by giving them a psychological depiction in the adaptation, which is in contrast to the superhero status in the book, makes the movie a success story when compared to the book. Works Cited The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. Dir. Peter Jackson. Perf. Elijah Wood, Viggo Mortensen, and Ian McKellen. New Line Cinema, 2003. DVD. Tolkien, John. R. R. The Return of the King. In The Lord of the Rings by John. R. R. Tolkien. [City of Publication: Publisher, Year of Publication. Medium of Publication.] Valente, Claire. “Translating Tolkien’s Epic: Peter Jackson’s.” Lord of the Rings. Intercollegiate Review 40.1 (2004): 35-43. Web. 25 Nov. 2012. Read More