Introduction
Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings (LOTR) films are among the most popular and successful films ever made. Tolkien’s book was published as three separate volumes in the late 1950s, yet was never filmed despite huge popularity. Ralph Bakshi released half of an animated version in 1978 and the BBC broadcast an adaptation in the early 1980s, but the complexities of the plot and locations meant that filming the trilogy was a huge task. Peter Jackson finally did so and, most agree, made a fine job of transferring LOTR to film. But how could such an epic and complex work be filmed? How could characters like Gollum and Sauron be realised on screen? And what changes would have to be made to the book to adapt it to a new medium?
This course looks at the background to The Lord of the Rings, beginning with its origins and how Tolkien came to write it. The full plots of the three films are explained, as are the characters and people essential to it. The popularity of the films means that millions of people have watched it; however, the complexity of the plot means some aspects of the films can pass viewers by. For anyone who has watched and enjoyed the trilogy but not completely understood all the twists and turns of the plot, this course fills in the background and offers opportunity for discussion. For those who have read the books as well as watched the films, the course gathers together the main information and criticisms of the trilogy as well as offering critical theory on the differences between the medium.
Each of the three films is analysed in detail, including general plot and character overview, film techniques used, locations, kingdoms, criticisms, areas for improvement and best scenes. They will be looked at both as a stand-alone movie trilogy and within the context of Tolkien’s work and Middle Earth in general. Each analysis also includes reaction to the film from critics, Tolkien fans and film fans. The course is intended to cover all the main aspects of the trilogy and answer the main questions, as well as to encourage debate of the films themselves and film technique in general.
Taster section – Arwen, Frodo and the banks of the Ford
In The Fellowship of the Ring, Frodo is stabbed through the shoulder by a Nazgul on Weathertop. A piece of the blade has remained in his shoulder, and, as he was stabbed by a wraith, he is in danger of becoming a wraith himself. Once this happens, he will give the Ring to Sauron. The hobbits and Aragorn are trying to get to Rivendell before the Nazgul catch up with them and before Frodo succumbs to his wound. It is becoming more and more obvious that they are not going to make it.
In the book, enter Glorfindel, an elf lord sent from Rivendell; in the film, enter Arwen, an elf and Aragorn’s love interest. There are a few reasons why Jackson should have stuck with Glorfindel (see below), but in the meantime the entrance of Arwen is nicely done. Aragorn is looking for athelas, a plant that might save Frodo, when a sword comes into view and a voice says, ‘What’s this? A ranger caught unawares?’ This has the double effect of showing Arwen’s skill – even Aragorn the Ranger did not hear her approaching – and of establishing her as a strong character. Although I think for its time that LOTR actually shows women in a mainly positive light, Jackson clearly wanted to incorporate a more modern approach with his use of Arwen here. This is emphasised by Arwen’s flight to the Ford with Frodo on her horse Asfolath.
But here is where Jackson should maybe have stuck with Glorfindel. Yes, Arwen saves Frodo by raising the Ford against the Nazgul – a very girl power moment and one of the most visually enchanting in the film. It is a great sequence, made all the more effective by the fact that it is one of the few places in the film where the Elvish is not subtitled, so the viewer as well as the Nazgul are unaware of what Arwen is saying (for those interested in Elvish, Arwen’s words here are, ‘Nîn o Chithaeglir/lasto beth daer;/Rimmo nîn Bruinen/dan in Ulaer!’, which translates as, 'Waters of the Misty Mountains/listen to the great word; flow waters of Loudwater/against the Ringwraiths!'). But in the book, Glorfindel is escorting the party to Rivendell when the Nazgul come upon them and Glorfindel urges the horse and Frodo to ‘ride on!’. Asfolath springs forward and crosses the Ford, but the Nazgul on the other side start to cross. Frodo can hear them telling him to come back to Mordor with them, and ‘with a great effort [he] sat upright and brandished his sword’. The Nazgul only laugh, and, despite Frodo’s bravery, their leader is halfway across the Ford when the river rises. As in the film, they are swept away.
It is obvious why Jackson chose to change the narrative here. Introducing another character might have been cumbersome and difficult to explain for those who had not read the book; building up Arwen’s character was necessary for her increased appearances in the second films, and in the book the journey to Rivendell with Glorfindel takes over a day and thus in a film would have lost the sense of urgency needed. But Frodo alone on the banks of the Ford was the first time he accepted full responsibility for the Ring and the quest and his telling the Nazgul they cannot have the Ring shows character development and a hint that he might after all succeed in the quest. Merely lolling on Arwen’s horse while she does all the work does not show him as a valid character – in the book despite his wound he tried to fight the Nazgul, even though it would not have worked without the river rising. However, like many of the changes from book to film, this one was clearly made for directorial reasons in changing the medium of the story, and so can probably pass. Agree or disagree?
Lessons
Click here to see course syllabus
