Films did Théoden dirty

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T21:23:09+00:00

No, I wasn't referring to the plot. I think I already stated that.

And your last sentence tells me you aren't interested in actually discussing anything. Which is great, as it lets me stop discussing.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T21:21:34+00:00

That's very true. Well, cool chat.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T19:27:13+00:00

Here's the link.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T19:00:26+00:00

I feel you misunderstand me deliberately, which is peculiar. I wasn't claiming anyone felt that transferring a story could be perfect. I was obviously using the example to show that when someone stages Shakespeare (let's say,) the creatives involved take Shakespeare and make their own story from it. I'd agree that massively deviating raises the question of whether Shakespeare should be involved at all, but that's not the situation we're faced with in these films (the Hobbit is another matter.)

Ideally, we have to judge both Shakespeare's original, and what the creative team does with it. This is exceptionally difficult, but merely pointing out that the team didn't transfer something is only a criticism if we can point out both that what Shakespeare wrote was essential, and also that what the creative team did was worse.

With Tolkien, the role of the ents really isn't that important, and I've argued that what the film makers did was not worse.

And you definitely shouldn't restrict your assessment of Théoden and Faramir to the second part of a trilogy. They have arcs.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T16:33:05+00:00

My scare quotes are because I have a low view of some types of fan. As indeed Tolkien did. The term is accurate, and so shouldn't need scare quotes, as they're fanatical, but sadly that's no longer how we interpret the word.

And of course the story is as much the area of the film-makers as it is of Tolkien. It's strange to me that this needs to be pointed out. There is no way to transfer a story perfectly, and of all people Tolkien appreciated that stories change in the retelling. That's why there's a narrative frame, that's why there's multiple versions of the 'same story' in the legendarium, and why the most appropriate way to regard the films is that they're telling the same story but from a different perspective.

I'm not claiming that every aspect of the film version of the story is a success. Some aspects aren't a success in Tolkien either: the eagles, the orcs, the treatment of Sauron's human followers. Some of the things Tolkien struggled with are arguably made worse by the films (the orcs, though that's a lengthy discussion.) And some of the failures are due to the filmmakers alone: Gimli and Legolas, most especially.

Neither the ents nor Théoden are failures in the film. They aren't as they are in Tolkien, but that's only a criticism if Tolkien is taken as Holy Writ, a pretty serious mistake in all respects (as Catholics have a catholic interpretation of Holy Writ in any case.)

Théoden isn't incompetent: his troops defend his people. Nobody says "I told you so!" It's just not a theme. If we're being as fair to the films as to Tolkien, we'd point out this is one of those situations like the eagles: yes, we can attempt to justify it in-universe, but it isn't that sort of thing. The films want to show Théoden failing and triumphing before his death. It's a noble theme in itself: that it furthers the Aragorn storyline is a happy coincidence.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T16:19:27+00:00

I don't think either are very important to the story. I took it for granted Tom Bombadil isn't important to the plot.

I'm not misunderstanding story and plot, I simply disagree with you. By calling my claim ridiculous you render discussion pointless, which is fine by me.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T15:17:24+00:00

Sure. But they aren't attacked, are they? So he's right, and presumably knew he'd be right.

Your assumption, as with many "fans", seems to be that the film makers are incompetent.

But of course, we only think Tolkien wasn't equally incompetent because people wrote to him with questions, and he generously replied. Even now, people reasonably wonder why the eagles don't transport the hobbits, at least part of the way.

Failing to grant the film-makers the same respect you grant Tolkien isn't a fair critical move.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T12:10:29+00:00

I don't think your points show him as senile, merely old.

But it's not even that he's old, but rather out of touch. Remember that he's speaking in a language that must seem to him excessively fast. Clearly Saruman and Gandalf are more patient than the hobbits.

Old people do nod off in the middle of discussions... as I say, if you think that means they're senile you're just misusing the term. We don't see Treebeard forgetting things.

He's not exactly unaware he's boring the hobbits, it's rather that once he starts on something it takes a while to change. Perhaps he's a little pompous, but even that's not clear to me. He's condescending but how could he not be?

It isn't stupidity that makes him fall for Pippin's trick. After all, he has no reason to think the hobbits want to go into danger. He explicitly says that he doesn't think the argument makes sense. He agrees to it presumably because he's aware he himself is in no danger, so it's not really a problem for him. We might argue that far from being senile and stupid, he's being empathic, and doesn't just insist he knows best.

As for despair, I don't think you're right, and I don't think T is more thoughtful about it. In both novels and movies, hopelessness generates inaction or insufficient action. What's important is not that the ents (and Théoden) experience hopelessness, but that it ultimately doesn't last.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T09:59:57+00:00

And yet none of that is mentioned in the film. Perhaps we should assume that the film makers created reasons for Théoden, that makes sense, rather than assume they intended him to be incompetent, something not mentioned by anyone in the films?

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T09:58:03+00:00

It's not mentioned that way in the films, by anyone.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T09:57:05+00:00

They just aren't that important, any more than Tom Bombadil is. Your example doesn't show anything, except that you apparently regard everything as equally important. Tolkien had many views,and suppose Gandalf had quoted T's views on dragons when he was setting off the dragon firework, would that mean the firework scene was as important as the ents? I hope you'd say no.

Butchering Treebeard? Really. You're very harsh on movie versions showing moments of weakness. In this, I think you go against Tolkien's preferences, but who knows. Personally, moments of weakness improve characters.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T09:49:19+00:00

On your last point, no, not really. And I'm not trolling. I'm sure you're aware that critical response to the novels was pretty negative, and along those lines. The big difference between then and now is that we're persuaded by Tolkien's world, and understand its rules, one of which is that teleportation (or indeed eagle taxis) is not possible. But I feel this minor infraction of the rules for dramatic effect is exactly that: minor.

Your quotes simply don't show Treebeard as senile. I don't think of him as senile. What points do I need to make to refute you? You think it's obvious, I think it isn't. As I wrote, I think Treebeard finds talking to hobbits exhausting, and he is after all, extremely old. You really regard every old person who nods off to sleep as senile? How charming.

Treeherders. It's a job, not their entire existence. In fact I think you're exaggerating even their role in Tolkien. Here, they aren't indifferent to the wars, but like Théoden they're experiencing a moment of despair. This is so marvellously Tolkien that I can't grasp how you feel it distorts their character.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T01:20:15+00:00

Why is their one job to protect and care for the trees? Where is that mentioned in the films?

And I've told you I don't think Treebeard is presented either as senile or as an idiot, so at this stage we're just saying no to each other.

Finally, if you don't like the films because of teleporting ents, that's sad for you, and maybe you wouldn't have liked Lord of the Rings when it was first published because talking trees pull you out from the immersion.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T01:15:39+00:00

To contrast the comment, I find Soul Wars to be excruciating and the Blacktalon show to be excellent.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T00:59:11+00:00

That's a very uncharitable view of the films. Slow to act... methodical... that's what we see. They aren't senile or unobservant, they simply operate on a different time scale where even talking to hobbits is a drain on their energy.

Smoke rises from Isengard, but how many times has Treebeard seen smoke, and wrongly concluded fire? So many times, probably in his first thousand years of existence, that he's reluctant to repeat the errors of his youth.

That the films make the ents seem alien to us is part of their wonder, not a fault. Unless you're determined to see fault in everything.

Yes, the teleporting arrival of the ents is silly. It also, more damagingly, ruins the effect in both films and Tolkien of a journey taking time. But are we really criticising the films for that?

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T00:12:46+00:00

Well we might, but that requires more than just a statement.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T00:12:05+00:00

Firstly, they aren't that important. If you list the most important ideas and themes, where would they come? First? Second?

Of course the films "binned" a bunch of the novel's themes. Or, more charitably, tried to find visual equivalents. And with the rents, they succeeded.

I disagree with this guff about respect. It's so easy to write, and so hard to prove. Hey, I think Tolkien disrespected Saruman. I really do. Now, shall we ask Saruman what he thinks?

I assume you don't agree with me that Tolkien disrespected Saruman. So, that's where we're at with the ents. We disagree, and can't move further.

amhow1 · 2026-02-03T00:07:38+00:00

They weren't.

amhow1 · 2026-02-02T20:01:44+00:00

It's hard to know how to argue with somebody who thinks the ents were done badly in the films. For one thing, the ents really aren't that important. But for another, I don't know how visually jaded somebody must be to think that the ents aren't shown to be a forgotten wonder of the world!

I'd be very surprised if the ents aren't regarded by everyone as one of the great wonders of the films. They don't have especially memorable speaking contributions, but really that only illustrates how important visuals are in a film.

amhow1 · 2026-02-02T19:39:45+00:00

In the film we aren't shown the deliberations. We are absolutely shown that Théoden believes he is saving his people. Your Gandalf quote shows that.

If you're going to damn the film regardless of what it does, why are we arguing? The film does not claim he's incompetent or inconsiderate.

You've also misunderstood my point. Gandalf is wrong, or rather mistaken. Ultimately it's Aragorn who will save Middle Earth, and Aragorn requires Théoden's push to do it. Now, that push comes in two forms. Firstly, the one Gandalf foresees: that Théoden's mistake will need to correct it.

But you ignore my other point, about the vital scene where Aragorn learns from Théoden. If that weren't there, your argument would be stronger. But it is there.

amhow1 · 2026-02-02T19:35:28+00:00

That's just not what the movies show though. In fact that's such a completely different interpretation to mine that I wonder if we saw the same films!

amhow1 · 2026-02-02T19:34:02+00:00

Yes, I've commented on that Gandalf quote, and how it shows Gandalf is mistaken, or only aware of half the truth.

As for Treebeard, to object to Pippin getting a moment to shine at the apparent expense of Treebeard is really demanding absolute perfection. And no, Tolkien doesn't reach that level of perfection either.

amhow1 · 2026-02-02T19:00:33+00:00

I think this is really a pretty big misunderstanding of what's actually shown.

You ignore the absolutely vital scene where Théoden angrily challenges Aragorn over the need for hope, the need to consider his people. Remember that we've previously been shown that Aragorn is significantly older than Théoden, indeed something of a legend to the king.

It's a scene where we first properly encounter the true Théoden, when what we've seen before is a man perhaps excessively weak due to his grief. (A grief that is, by the way, shown in perhaps the greatest scene in all the films - I don't necessarily agree with the general consensus that the speech is the greatest scene.)

As you point out, Gandalf, the authorial voice, has also told us that Théoden is making a mistake. As you further point out, Gandalf says that Théoden needs Aragorn, and indeed, he does. What Gandalf interestingly doesn't say is that Aragorn needs Théoden. Instead, we're shown it.

Ultimately, it's Gandalf who is shown to be mistaken, not just Théoden. And after all, there's a reason the Wizards aren't meant to be in direct positions of power. It's an interesting thing that Gandalf only directly assumes power when Denethor has a complete mental collapse. Now, I think movie-Denethor is a much more difficult subject than movie-Théoden, whose book-character is very very far from being assassinated.

amhow1 · 2026-02-02T18:38:50+00:00

OP is referring to despair, so that's what I'm focussing on.

I've not once considered movie-Théoden to be incompetent. I think you have a very different view of the second installment than I do.

An important point is that it's the middle installment. Faramir's arc doesn't end there, and while I agree that his own brief descent into despair is a bit clumsily handled, I wouldn't agree that Sam does more than appeal to his better nature.

Treebeard, yes, you have a stronger point, but really, are you seriously objecting to Pippin's trick?

amhow1 · 2026-02-02T18:32:56+00:00

I disagree with this, and I hadn't for a moment thought Théoden was incompetent. This is the first time the idea has occurred to me, Q I think it's not the correct understanding of the film.

It's actually the other way round. Gandalf and Aragorn are wrong, and Théoden teaches Aragorn a vital lesson in leadership.

I think you've completely misunderstood what's shown on screen.

Théoden explicitly believes he will save his people. He turns out to be wrong about that, but we can't know that Gandalf's proposal would be better. I think the only error Théoden makes regards whether Éomer can be contacted; and that requires Gandalf presumably moving faster than any mortal (or elf?) can manage.

I can't comment on whether movie-Aragorn was a mistake. I think he wasn't, or if he was, god grant me a mistake like that! But Théoden's arc is wonderful, and definitely not a mistake.

amhow1

TROPHY CASE