Movie Errors

You wouldn't see so many so-called 'errors' if you just used a little
imagination.

manfromat RemoveThis @aol.com wrote:
 > I know that many people dislike the films here. I love the design of
 > the films but the changes made to the plot annoy me no end.
 >
 > I have spotted two actual mistakes in the film due to the changes
made,
 > has anybody spotted any others.
 >
 > 1) At the council of Elrond, Frodo produces the ring and everybody
 > immediately knows what it is. It's been lost for 1000's of years.
 > Gandalf himself had been unsure for 50 years. Where do all these
people
 > get thier knowledge from.

According to the films, they have been called to Council because of the
One Ring (see Denethor's conversation with Boromir in the Extended
Edition Two Towers if you really need specific evidence, although it is
clearly implied in Fellowship that they are gathered for this purpose).
Are they supposed to assume that Frodo is simply placing a random ring
on the pedestal, even though they all know why they have been called
there? You don't need to visually recognise it or to know what it
should look like to believe that Frodo has obviously just placed the
One Ring on the pedestal. So THAT'S what it looks like! Takes your
breath away. You have misinterpreted the meaning of their reaction.

 > 2) In TTT Theoden has to be restrained from killing Wormtougne but by
 > RotK EE he is willing too welcome him back with open arms. What
brought
 > about this change of heart.

In order to make this into an 'error' you have to assume that people
are steady-state robots. Theoden within minutes of being released from
a spell woven on him through Wormtongue is naturally prone to overreact
and want to exact vengeance on his former advisor. In the cold light of
distance and after a harrowing battle, he has come to the more rational
conclusion: Saruman is the real evil here, the real source of his woes,
and the proper target of his anger. Wormtongue is as much a victim of
Saruman's power as Theoden himself was. No mystery here, either, if you
do the films the courtesy of believing that they depict real people
that sometimes change their minds over time without necessarily making
speeches about it. This is the same courtesy that you would do any
relationship film like 'In The Bedroom'.

There ARE places where the film changes create certain inconsistencies
not present in the books. But you haven't pinpointed them.

DB.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors 

Dogger the Filmgoblin wrote:
 > You wouldn't see so many so-called 'errors' if you just used a little
 > imagination.
 >
 > manfromat.DeleteThis@aol.com wrote:
  > > I know that many people dislike the films here. I love the design
of
  > > the films but the changes made to the plot annoy me no end.
  > >
  > > I have spotted two actual mistakes in the film due to the changes
 > made,
  > > has anybody spotted any others.
  > >
  > > 1) At the council of Elrond, Frodo produces the ring and everybody
  > > immediately knows what it is. It's been lost for 1000's of years.
  > > Gandalf himself had been unsure for 50 years. Where do all these
 > people
  > > get thier knowledge from.
 >
 > According to the films, they have been called to Council because of
the
 > One Ring (see Denethor's conversation with Boromir in the Extended
 > Edition Two Towers if you really need specific evidence, although it
is
 > clearly implied in Fellowship that they are gathered for this
purpose).
 > Are they supposed to assume that Frodo is simply placing a random
ring
 > on the pedestal, even though they all know why they have been called
 > there? You don't need to visually recognise it or to know what it
 > should look like to believe that Frodo has obviously just placed the
 > One Ring on the pedestal. So THAT'S what it looks like! Takes your
 > breath away. You have misinterpreted the meaning of their reaction.
 >
  > > 2) In TTT Theoden has to be restrained from killing Wormtougne but
by
  > > RotK EE he is willing too welcome him back with open arms. What
 > brought
  > > about this change of heart.
 >
 > In order to make this into an 'error' you have to assume that people
 > are steady-state robots. Theoden within minutes of being released
from
 > a spell woven on him through Wormtongue is naturally prone to
overreact
 > and want to exact vengeance on his former advisor. In the cold light
of
 > distance and after a harrowing battle, he has come to the more
rational
 > conclusion: Saruman is the real evil here, the real source of his
woes,
 > and the proper target of his anger. Wormtongue is as much a victim of
 > Saruman's power as Theoden himself was. No mystery here, either, if
you
 > do the films the courtesy of believing that they depict real people
 > that sometimes change their minds over time without necessarily
making
 > speeches about it. This is the same courtesy that you would do any
 > relationship film like 'In The Bedroom'.
 >
 > There ARE places where the film changes create certain
inconsistencies
 > not present in the books. But you haven't pinpointed them.
 >
 > DB.

How about when Legolas announces Aragorn's identity to Boromir-also at
the Council-and Boromir automatically knows who Aragorn is? All
Legolas said was "Aragorn, son of Arathorn", and Boromir says, "This is
Isildur's heir?"

How the heck did boromir know? Wasn't Aragorn's identity kept secret
for a long time because they didn't want the Enemy knowing that an heir
of Isildur still lived?

vandevere<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors 

On 27 Dec 2004 18:09:48 -0800, vonhooligan.RemoveThis@juno.com wrote:
 >How about when Legolas announces Aragorn's identity to Boromir-also at
 >the Council-and Boromir automatically knows who Aragorn is? All
 >Legolas said was "Aragorn, son of Arathorn", and Boromir says, "This is
 >Isildur's heir?"
 >
 >How the heck did boromir know? Wasn't Aragorn's identity kept secret
 >for a long time because they didn't want the Enemy knowing that an heir
 >of Isildur still lived?

Yep.

And the fine way it's presented, I expected Boromir to say something
like, "sorry mate, I thought you were in Mexico". Movie shortcut.
Shrug.

J.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors 

<manfromat RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote in message
news:1104156100.682152.286920@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
 > I know that many people dislike the films here. I love the design of
 > the films but the changes made to the plot annoy me no end.
 >
 > I have spotted two actual mistakes in the film due to the changes made,
 > has anybody spotted any others.
 >
 > 1) At the council of Elrond, Frodo produces the ring and everybody
 > immediately knows what it is. It's been lost for 1000's of years.
 > Gandalf himself had been unsure for 50 years. Where do all these people
 > get thier knowledge from.
 >
 > 2) In TTT Theoden has to be restrained from killing Wormtougne but by
 > RotK EE he is willing too welcome him back with open arms. What brought
 > about this change of heart.
 >

1) I think the implication (and, certainly what I assumed when I first saw
the film, never having read the book,) was that the whole purpose of that
council was to discuss what to do with the Ring, so logically everyone there
would have been informed previously that the Ring had been found, and just
what the Ring is.

2) Good point. Never really thought of that.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors 

"The Man With No Name" <none.RemoveThis@none.com> wrote in
news:41d11a56$0$27721$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au:

 >
 > <manfromat.RemoveThis@aol.com> wrote in message
 > news:1104156100.682152.286920@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
  >> I know that many people dislike the films here. I love the design of
  >> the films but the changes made to the plot annoy me no end.
  >>
  >> I have spotted two actual mistakes in the film due to the changes
  >> made, has anybody spotted any others.
  >>
  >> 1) At the council of Elrond, Frodo produces the ring and everybody
  >> immediately knows what it is. It's been lost for 1000's of years.
  >> Gandalf himself had been unsure for 50 years. Where do all these
  >> people get thier knowledge from.
  >>
  >> 2) In TTT Theoden has to be restrained from killing Wormtougne but by
  >> RotK EE he is willing too welcome him back with open arms. What
  >> brought about this change of heart.
  >>
 >
 > 1) I think the implication (and, certainly what I assumed when I first
 > saw the film, never having read the book,) was that the whole purpose
 > of that council was to discuss what to do with the Ring, so logically
 > everyone there would have been informed previously that the Ring had
 > been found, and just what the Ring is.
 >
 > 2) Good point. Never really thought of that.
 >
 >
 >

I'd had the impression that Theoden had had time to think it over and
realize Wormtongue was more victim than villain. Saruman was the one he
was really pissed at now, and I imagine Theoden would have had a serious
problem with Gandalf if S. has been able to accept the parole G. had
offered.

Just a thought.

-- Bob<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors 

"JXStern" <JXSternChangeX2R.TakeThisOut@gte.net> wrote in message
news:9nk1t0t0te6e97bhim3j06rm027lcegbc4@4ax.com...
 > On 27 Dec 2004 18:09:48 -0800, vonhooligan.TakeThisOut@juno.com wrote:
  > >How about when Legolas announces Aragorn's identity to Boromir-also at
  > >the Council-and Boromir automatically knows who Aragorn is? All
  > >Legolas said was "Aragorn, son of Arathorn", and Boromir says, "This is
  > >Isildur's heir?"
  > >
  > >How the heck did boromir know? Wasn't Aragorn's identity kept secret
  > >for a long time because they didn't want the Enemy knowing that an heir
  > >of Isildur still lived?
 >
 > Yep.
 >
 > And the fine way it's presented, I expected Boromir to say something
 > like, "sorry mate, I thought you were in Mexico". Movie shortcut.
 > Shrug.
 >
 > J.
 >

Just a wild guess, but might not the son of the Steward of Gondor know the
then-current theories about the lineage of Isildur? The history of Middle
Earth is not a secret to those who live in it.

Why is it that when the movie characters act with any intelligence, this is
a sign of a flaw in the movie?<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors 

 >Dogger the Filmgoblin wrote:
  >> You wouldn't see so many so-called 'errors' if you just used a little
  >> imagination.
  >>
  >> manfromat.DeleteThis@aol.com wrote:
   >> > I know that many people dislike the films here. I love the design
 >of
   >> > the films but the changes made to the plot annoy me no end.
   >> >
   >> > I have spotted two actual mistakes in the film due to the changes
  >> made,
   >> > has anybody spotted any others.
   >> >
   >> > 1) At the council of Elrond, Frodo produces the ring and everybody
   >> > immediately knows what it is. It's been lost for 1000's of years.
   >> > Gandalf himself had been unsure for 50 years. Where do all these
  >> people
   >> > get thier knowledge from.
  >>
  >> According to the films, they have been called to Council because of
 >the
  >> One Ring (see Denethor's conversation with Boromir in the Extended
  >> Edition Two Towers if you really need specific evidence, although it
 >is
  >> clearly implied in Fellowship that they are gathered for this
 >purpose).
  >> Are they supposed to assume that Frodo is simply placing a random
 >ring
  >> on the pedestal, even though they all know why they have been called
  >> there? You don't need to visually recognise it or to know what it
  >> should look like to believe that Frodo has obviously just placed the
  >> One Ring on the pedestal. So THAT'S what it looks like! Takes your
  >> breath away. You have misinterpreted the meaning of their reaction.
  >>
   >> > 2) In TTT Theoden has to be restrained from killing Wormtougne but
 >by
   >> > RotK EE he is willing too welcome him back with open arms. What
  >> brought
   >> > about this change of heart.
  >>
  >> In order to make this into an 'error' you have to assume that people
  >> are steady-state robots. Theoden within minutes of being released
 >from
  >> a spell woven on him through Wormtongue is naturally prone to
 >overreact
  >> and want to exact vengeance on his former advisor. In the cold light
 >of
  >> distance and after a harrowing battle, he has come to the more
 >rational
  >> conclusion: Saruman is the real evil here, the real source of his
 >woes,
  >> and the proper target of his anger. Wormtongue is as much a victim of
  >> Saruman's power as Theoden himself was. No mystery here, either, if
 >you
  >> do the films the courtesy of believing that they depict real people
  >> that sometimes change their minds over time without necessarily
 >making
  >> speeches about it. This is the same courtesy that you would do any
  >> relationship film like 'In The Bedroom'.
  >>
  >> There ARE places where the film changes create certain
 >inconsistencies
  >> not present in the books. But you haven't pinpointed them.
  >>
  >> DB.
 >
 >How about when Legolas announces Aragorn's identity to Boromir-also at
 >the Council-and Boromir automatically knows who Aragorn is? All
 >Legolas said was "Aragorn, son of Arathorn", and Boromir says, "This is
 >Isildur's heir?"
 >
 >How the heck did boromir know? Wasn't Aragorn's identity kept secret
 >for a long time because they didn't want the Enemy knowing that an heir
 >of Isildur still lived?

I don't recall if it's explicit anywhere in the film, but the back-story of
Aragorn looks quite different in the films. As you say, in the books, the line
of Isildur had disappeared for, say, 1500 years or so. Only a few of the wise
knew the line still existed. Moreover, we know Isildur's line was associated
more with Arnor than Gondor.

In the movies, there's no Arnor/Gondor distinction. Aragorn is simply the lost
king of Gondor. Also, it appears not that his line was lost as much at it
almost abdicated the throne and left it to the stewards. In addition, this
abdication appears to have been much more recent in the movies than in the
books.

Russ<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors 

The Council was sloppy writing for the film, greatly inferior to
the book.

Theoden was offering
Grima a chance to renounce his former ways, after Theoden had
cooled off. Not great writing, but plausible.

There are many downright horrible examples of poor screenwriting
and filmmaking in these movies. One can easily name more than two.
But the movies have redeeming values too.

-cr
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors 

concerning rotk ee errors: [spoilers]
at the very end of the film at the grey havens, in the last shot we see
of him his waistcoat is missing! the reason for the missing waistcoat
is in one of the documentaries, i think on the making of the film, but
you think they would have covered it after filming it 3 times!!!!
also, in gandalf [and pippins] encounter with the witch-king atop the
minas tirith walls gandalf's staff is shattered. how come it appears
again later in the film?
thirdly, [and finally for now] when our main group is riding back to
the gathered soldiers after their meeting with the mouth of sauron,
where did his horse go? they just switched back to the original
theatrical scene and the horse [and rider] disappear! there are
probably other mistakes, but we will need to watch it a few more times
before we see them! other than the above mentioned, the film is
excellent and well deserving of _all_ its movie awards!!!
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors 

Russ <mcresq.DeleteThis@aol.comjunk.net> wrote:

<snip>

 > I don't recall if it's explicit anywhere in the film, but the
 > back-story of Aragorn looks quite different in the films. As you
 > say, in the books, the line of Isildur had disappeared for, say, 1500
 > years or so. Only a few of the wise knew the line still existed.
 > Moreover, we know Isildur's line was associated more with Arnor than
 > Gondor.
 >
 > In the movies, there's no Arnor/Gondor distinction. Aragorn is
 > simply the lost king of Gondor. Also, it appears not that his line
 > was lost as much at it almost abdicated the throne and left it to the
 > stewards. In addition, this abdication appears to have been much
 > more recent in the movies than in the books.

And Isildur was the last King of Gondor. Apparently. And the Northern
Kingdom does get some fleeting references in the films.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors 

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004 13:33:20 -0800, "Warchild" <bob.TakeThisOut@bob.com> wrote:
   >> >How the heck did boromir know? Wasn't Aragorn's identity kept secret
   >> >for a long time because they didn't want the Enemy knowing that an heir
   >> >of Isildur still lived?
  >>
  >> Yep.
  >>
  >> And the fine way it's presented, I expected Boromir to say something
  >> like, "sorry mate, I thought you were in Mexico". Movie shortcut.
  >> Shrug.
 >
 >Just a wild guess, but might not the son of the Steward of Gondor know the
 >then-current theories about the lineage of Isildur? The history of Middle
 >Earth is not a secret to those who live in it.

Denethor apparently knew because he'd looked into the palantir, but it
seems that Gandalf didn't know that he knew, which in general I would
take as a sign that it wasn't widely known, even to Denethor's son.
In the book, Elrond explains who Aragorn is to Boromir, who I guess
might have known that someone existed but not that it was this grungy
guy in front of him, but I'd certainly never read it that way. All
Boromir said to anyone is that he and Faramir had had this dream,
terribly obscure. He didn't announce to Elrond or anyone, "Hey, I'm
here to pick up the heir of Isildur and a magic sword, where are
they?"

 >Why is it that when the movie characters act with any intelligence, this is
 >a sign of a flaw in the movie?

Come on now, in the movie Legolas jumps to his feet and explains it
all to the audience, including "you owe him your allegiance!", and
Boromir stands there with his mouth open. OK, it's real tough to give
these narrative explanations in a movie without putting the words in
someone's mouth, but it's considered poor cinema, but it's also
economical cinema in terms of running time and scriptwriting effort,
that's all I'm saying.

J.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors 

On 27 Dec 2004 06:01:40 -0800, manfromat.RemoveThis@aol.com wrote:
 >2) In TTT Theoden has to be restrained from killing Wormtougne but by
 >RotK EE he is willing too welcome him back with open arms. What brought
 >about this change of heart.

It's an echo of how it is in the book, where Frodo offers Wormtongue a
chance to recover a bit before moving on.

And also in the book, when Grima is first revealed, Theoden at that
time gave him the option of staying and fighting with the Rohirrim,
and they omit that in the movie, and move it to this later date, in
effect.

So, it's in the text, more or less.

J.<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors 

Warchild wrote:

 ><manfromat.RemoveThis@aol.com> wrote in message
 >news:1104156100.682152.286920@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
 >
 >
  >>In TTT Theoden has to be restrained from killing Wormtougne but by
  >>RotK EE he is willing too welcome him back with open arms. What brought
  >>about this change of heart.
  >>
 >
 >You mischaracterize Theoden's offer. Theoden was offering mercy to a man
 >who seemed to be under Saruman's influence. Theoden sympathized.
 >
Possibly he was attempting to further undermine Saruman's position.

Pete H

--
Either everyone has rights or some have privileges.
It's really that simple.
    Walt Kelly<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Movie Errors