The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim producer Philippa Boyens attempted to defend her desecration of Tolkien’s lore in the film by claiming she and the people who worked on the film “can’t ruin” Tolkien’s books.Fandom Pulse is a reader-supported publication.
I know there are a lot of people, especially those younger than me, that think the Jackson trilogy is brilliant, but I have to disagree wholeheartedly. Despite some good bits and the visual splendor of the films, they actually did a lot of damage to the lore, and much of that is clearly down to Walsh and Boyens. Once again, women ruin everything.
100000% correct about the damage done by Jackson's films. I saw each of them the day they were released in theaters but have not watched them since despite having read LOTR at least 50 times over the years(to say I'm a LOTR fanatic is understating my love of these books). Jackson completely destroyed Faramir's character by having him choose to take the ring from Frodo thus negating the differences between Faramir and Boromir, the battle between Gandalf and Sauruman was just a disgrace, and Jackson made Frodo into nothing more than a whiny bitch of a hobbit. Jackson also did not include the man who was responsible for the death of the Witch King during the Battle of the Pellenor Fields, Tom Bombadil. How? Bombadil, during his rescue of the hobbits from the Barrow Wights, gives Merry a sword he found in the barrows, the same sword that Merry uses to pierce the hauberk of the Witch King's knee thus allowing Eowyn to cut his head off. People always dismiss the character of Bombadil as childish but he plays a very significant role in the downfall of Sauron.
They absolutely shredded the character of almost everyone in Gondor except Boromir. Denethor is reduced to a pathetic, comical pantomime villain in the films, and you are spot on about Faramir.
The only 2 characters who, IMO, actually represented Tolkien's characters were Gandalf, Gollum, and Sam, everyone else was just awful(especially Orlando Bloom as Legolas, ugh, he was epically awful in all the movies). I typically love Viggo Mortenson's acting but he had zero charisma as Aragorn, felt he was almost as whiny and useless as Frodo was.
Unclear where she got it? This is to say nothing about the quality of adaptation—I have no doubt based on the summary that War of the Rohirrim is a stinking mess. But she gets it from Letters 131: “I had a mind to make a body of more or less connected legend, ranging from the large and cosmogonic, to the level of romantic fairy-story - the larger founded on the lesser in contact with the earth, the lesser drawing splendour from the vast backcloths - which I could dedicate simply to: to England; to my country. ... I would draw some of the great tales in fullness, and leave many only placed in the scheme, and sketched. The cycles should be linked to a majestic whole, and yet leave scope for other minds and hands, wielding paint and music and drama.”
I know there are a lot of people, especially those younger than me, that think the Jackson trilogy is brilliant, but I have to disagree wholeheartedly. Despite some good bits and the visual splendor of the films, they actually did a lot of damage to the lore, and much of that is clearly down to Walsh and Boyens. Once again, women ruin everything.
100000% correct about the damage done by Jackson's films. I saw each of them the day they were released in theaters but have not watched them since despite having read LOTR at least 50 times over the years(to say I'm a LOTR fanatic is understating my love of these books). Jackson completely destroyed Faramir's character by having him choose to take the ring from Frodo thus negating the differences between Faramir and Boromir, the battle between Gandalf and Sauruman was just a disgrace, and Jackson made Frodo into nothing more than a whiny bitch of a hobbit. Jackson also did not include the man who was responsible for the death of the Witch King during the Battle of the Pellenor Fields, Tom Bombadil. How? Bombadil, during his rescue of the hobbits from the Barrow Wights, gives Merry a sword he found in the barrows, the same sword that Merry uses to pierce the hauberk of the Witch King's knee thus allowing Eowyn to cut his head off. People always dismiss the character of Bombadil as childish but he plays a very significant role in the downfall of Sauron.
There is a great post by a friend of mine which goes into exactly this phenomenon. https://open.substack.com/pub/jdanielsawyer/p/we-need-to-talk-about-frodo?r=etiij&utm_medium=ios
That was a fantastic article, thanks for the link.
You’re welcome 😊
They absolutely shredded the character of almost everyone in Gondor except Boromir. Denethor is reduced to a pathetic, comical pantomime villain in the films, and you are spot on about Faramir.
The only 2 characters who, IMO, actually represented Tolkien's characters were Gandalf, Gollum, and Sam, everyone else was just awful(especially Orlando Bloom as Legolas, ugh, he was epically awful in all the movies). I typically love Viggo Mortenson's acting but he had zero charisma as Aragorn, felt he was almost as whiny and useless as Frodo was.
Unclear where she got it? This is to say nothing about the quality of adaptation—I have no doubt based on the summary that War of the Rohirrim is a stinking mess. But she gets it from Letters 131: “I had a mind to make a body of more or less connected legend, ranging from the large and cosmogonic, to the level of romantic fairy-story - the larger founded on the lesser in contact with the earth, the lesser drawing splendour from the vast backcloths - which I could dedicate simply to: to England; to my country. ... I would draw some of the great tales in fullness, and leave many only placed in the scheme, and sketched. The cycles should be linked to a majestic whole, and yet leave scope for other minds and hands, wielding paint and music and drama.”
How is it possible that there has been such a failure of succession?
You can, and you did. Thanks for ruining another IP, lady.