Also I love how in the book version it's Theodens idea(not Aragorns) to charge out with the dawn. Aragorn spends most of that conversation trying to think of how to get theoden to safety, only to see Theoden selflessly sacrifice himself so his people can escape through the caves. I feel like this sort of teaches Aragorn a little bit about what it means to be a King
@@cegesh1459 I see your point but this being TH-cam I'm going to need to break it down to a quantum level lol: only a sith deals in absolutes. Kings are people and As people they are a mixed bag of mostly bad with Some okay, and even a bad king can do good things (and vice versa) Also, this is LotR. The only morally grey realistic-ISH monarch is Denethor. Everyone else is there to serve as a heroic figure to stand against Saurons horde of cannibal monsters, which by comparison make most people look pretty alright, king or otherwise
One of my favorite passages in the book is when Aragorn stood up on the wall in parley and warned the Army of Saruman that they had little time left because the dawn was coming. It was one of many times that Aragorn seemed to say prophetic things.
Disagree, the special effects in helms deep beats your imagination easy! I mean PFFT! When i read this my imagination at best was the old cartoon quality! Lol
I had never heard of LoTR when I reluctantly walked into the theater with my dad to watch The Two Towers. To be honest, I thought the movie sounded a little bit nerdy when he explained the basic story to me. I just wanted to hang out with my dad and have a guys night out. It completely blew my mind. I had absolutely no idea what was going on and I was rediculously confused most of the time, but I didn't care. I was on the edge of my seat the entire time. It will always be my favorite movie of all time. It's a masterpiece to me.
Book Battle of Helm's Deep - the elves showing up makes less and less sense the more you dig into the lore. Theoden's character is flattened, draining the fullness of his healing by Gandalf.
I can totally understand and wanting the movie to be more like the book, but also how Peter Jackson made the battle of the Hornburg more of an iconic and unforgettable scene from working with just a few pages is beyond genuine! Also for Hollywood purposes when you see the elves reinforcements out of nowhere it got me so pumped as a little kid back in the day, (still does)! Just my two cents!
I’d argue that movie didn’t have the time to even set up the context of why the elves showing up wouldn’t make sense, so for the purposes of the movie, I think we are to assume that that context isn’t applicable, making the inclusion of the elves acceptable. In the end, for an adaptation, it’s better to do something that doesn’t make sense BECAUSE you’re familiar with the source material than it is to do something that doesn’t make sense UNLESS you’re familiar with the source material, so long as you maintain the adaptation’s own internal consistency. An adaptation needs to be able to stand on its own, and I think it’s safe to say the The Lord of the Rings movies largely succeeded in that, even if things are inconsistent with the books.
I love the movie version, but I really wish the elves wouldn’t have shown up. It truly takes away from the feeling of “this is men, backs against the wall with everything to loose and still fighting to the last.” I would love to see more of the elves, but this isn’t the Last Alliance. This was men fighting tooth and nail for their own survival (and that of the women and children) against insurmountable odds.
If a company of elves shows up, might as well have had Saruman's forces supported by Gundam mecha robots countered by Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli piloting Evas. 🙄🙄🙄🙄
Yeah, for me that was the stupidest thing in the whole movie. Helm's Deep was about the struggles of men, not elves. And I hated how Eomer was relegated to just a small side part in the movies...
I don't normally comment on TH-cam videos but I wanted to say a bit about this. I'm somewhat disappointed in your summary of the book battle. The nature of the battle is different from in the movie. wonder if your summary of the book battle was influenced by the movie battle. This is my favorite moment in the books so I would like to explain how I view the battle and Tolkein's telling of it. In the movie, Helm's Deep resembles a castle fortress. In the book, it is a massive geographical feature in which men have constructed various fortifications. Importantly, it consists of a narrow gorge leading to the Hornburg, and in this gorge is a massive cave system. The reader is made aware of the folk knowledge that "No foe has ever taken the Hornburg if men defended it." Nobody mentions why that is, but we're about to find out. During the battle, many of Rohan's forces are forced back into the cave system, where it is estimated that they can survive and hold out for a long time. Saruman's forces continue deeper and deeper into the valley, eventually reaching the Hornburg. At this point it appears all is lost, and Theoden decides to ride out and die fighting. The Hornburg sounds its namesake instrument, which echoes throughout Helm's Deep. While Theoden has his moment of glory, Rohan's forces in the caves, which are now behind and surrounding Saruman's forces, also sound their horns and attack. It is only now that the reader can understand the defensive strength of Helm's Deep, the purpose of the Hornburg, and the reason that it has never fallen while men defend it. The giant horn serves as a signal to forces in the cave system, allowing a coordinated, devastating attack on any army that reaches the Hornburg; an army that now finds itself surrounded. It is a huge moment to suddenly grasp the folk wisdom about Helm's Deep and the reason for the Hornburg's construction, wisdom that was lost and has been found again, all while something awakens in the kingdoms of men and they rise to fight Sauron. Tolkien didn't write a lengthy military treatise on this battle. He writes it in a simple way. However, after being involved in 2 world wars and studying the folk stories of countless historic battles, he could not have been oblivious to the tactical details of this chapter. I think he intended there to be a theme in this battle about folk knowledge. Helm's Deep itself is named after a legendary warrior Helm Hammerhand, and in Theoden's moment of glory, the men rally and shout "Helm! Helm is arisen and back to war!" The understanding of Helm's Deep had been lost to time, and all that remained was folk knowledge in the form of "The Hornburg has never fallen to assault" Throughout this chapter we rediscover the lost truth behind that folk knowledge, and nothing could be more Tolkien than that. Of course there are other themes and significant parts to this chapter, but those are well represented in the movie. If you read this whole thing then I thank you. It's just my opinion about my favorite chapter in Tolkien's work.
@@AudraT Could have been another entire movie. The four returning Hobbits plus some new charactors, and some old charactors (from the book) like Tom Cotton, Farmer Maggot and Rosie revisited and expanded. It would be a bit difficult to bring in the now powerless Saruman, but could be worked in and around, since the non extended version of the movie didn't show his death. Could be made long enough with some of the events of the 4 years before Frodo leaves for the Havens, too.
I prefer the book version for 2 main reasons: The elf army should not have been involved, and the Hourns and Ents were key and should have played a big role in the film.
Agreed. It was a tragedy how the Ents & Hourns were portrayed. The Elves showing up all the way from Rivendell to help defend Helm's Deep made no sense
The battle for Helms Deep is my favourite part of all 3 films. So much I've made a model of it for 28mm wargaming.(it's huge) I know the elves didn't come in the book but i do really like the costumes for them.
Yeah, the fighting at Osgiliath and Minas Tirith in ROTK felt flat by comparison. For me this was mostly because the Gondor soldiers look utterly incompetent and pathetic. They're supposed to be professionals, yet they get their asses handed to them, even in one-on-one fights, against poorly equipped orcs half their size! While this is fantasy, one of my biggest gripes in these or historical films, is armour is almost always useless in movies, when in reality it worked very well. Even if they were a bunch of moronic incompetents, the Gondorian soldiers still should have been practically invulnerable in full-plate armour, except when overwhelmed by sheer numbers or getting whacked by a troll's hammer!
@@legionarybooks13 ye I'm not much of a fan of ROTK. The part where pippin and gandalf are on the wall as a siege tower disgorges it's orcs and gandalf is just clubbing orcs with his blade and staff and they just die instantly with a bonk. He wallops one in the neck with his sword and don't even brake the skin XD . Not like helms deep where Aragon is chopping off legs and running uruks through. Probably the best scene of the 3 films is Boromir's last stand where he fights with arrows striking out of him then Aragon's duel with Lurtz.
@@L0rdslashstab, ROTK felt anticlimactic, in part because how awesome the Battle of Helms Deep was in the second film. Had the Gondorian soldiers just shown a shred of competency, making it appear that it is numbers alone that overwhelmed them, it would have worked so much better. And yeah, Helms Deep definitely had a more realistic, gritty feel to it. The fighting between the elves / men and Uruks was brutal. One part that always got to me was when the Uruk ram breaches the gate and it impales one of the Rohan soldiers. Savage.
@@legionarybooks13 rofl ye and the guy bashes his head on the gate as the uruks pull the pike back XD and Theoden stabs an uruk in the face with a spear XD it's awesome.
It is difficult to pick a favorite version when each holds its place in its own venue. I thoroughly enjoyed the books and I particularly preferred the idea that the King would lead and army to divert an enemy from the people -- elderly, women, and children -- in order to keep them safe. I agree that the wisdom of the King is tarnished by the movie version, but I can also see the reasons behind the movie-folks reasons for the change. There is a big difference between holding the attention of a reader of a book and enticing them to invest in the next book in the trilogy, and holding the attention and interest of a movie-goer and enticing them to invest in the sequel. Comparing the way a story is presented in a book as opposed to how it is presented in a movie is much like comparing apples and oranges -- two different venues, two different audiences; thus most often two different opinions.
I like how Jackson didn’t ruin things with his changes. They work. It kind of bothered me how they created a female elf in the Hobbit that wasn’t in the book. It’s one thing to change scenes. It’s another to completely add a new character not in the lore. The extended editions of the trilogy is definitely the way to go.
I didn't mind Tariel as a character, but the whole love story with her and Kili (or was it Fili?) was so monumentally STUPID, even Evangeline Lilly has openly expressed her disgust towards it. My only other issues with her and Legolas was they had way too much screen time. It would make sense for Legolas to have a cameo, as he is Thranduil's son. I assume he's not mentioned in the book, because Tolkien probably hadn't created him yet in 1937. But it should have been a cameo, like when they ambush the dwarves in Mirkwood, and left at that. Plus Legolas and Tariel are so overpowered, there's never any tension when they're fighting the orcs. I did see a fan edit that cuts the bloated 8 1/2 hour Hobbit trilogy and streamlines to a more manageable 3 hours, 45 minutes, making it far more enjoyable, and more in line with the book.
@@legionarybooks13 In the last two Hobbit movies, Jackson was clearly trying to replicate Aragorn and Arwen's love story from LOTR. Two problems with that: 1. the love story isn't in the book so it's not going to feel organic, natural, or important to the story because it literally can't be. 2. He made it into a love triangle which was even more unnecessary. I'll defend adding Legolas to the movies. I've read that Tolkien wanted to make another edition of The Hobbit where he'd retroactively go back and add Legolas in certain parts but died before he could ever write it. I'll fully agree with you that Legolas being a video game character was really stupid haha.
@@spencerkindra8822, I didn't know that about Tolkien wanting to go back and add him in. I love the charcter, both in book and film, and think Orlando Bloom played it perfectly. But yeah, he was too "videogame-ish" even in the LOTR films. Doing his Super Mario impression in the Hobbit just left me groaning. The love triangle was also really stupid because it stemmed from a really lame dick joke. Plus, elves and dwarves HATED each other. That's why Legolas and Gimli's friendship was so special. Same as was when Galadriel gave Gimli three strands of her hair; something she denied her creepy uncle, Feanor, a few thousand years earlier!
Despite how much I love the movies, there are some things about the Helms Deep battle that irk me... Legolas surfboarding on a shield down the steps while using his bow. Aragon and Gimli throwing themselves into certain danger against a large oncoming swath of orcs. But I do love the feel and sense of dread the movie gives off that feel straight from the books.
I was so very excited at the prospect of the films, however I had not thought that such liberties would be taken. Jackson almost destroyed my love of the story, and this is before seeing Gimli turned into a comedy side note.
@@elizabethanne8729 I left my first time reading of the LOTR so enamoured for how strongly Gimli was able to confront and deal with the contradictions in his life and evolve into more, the film just took the lazy option too many times for me to feel happy watching it. I understand it had to be converted into mass appeal, but it often feels as if it is little more than a poorly edited mix of Gladiator, Carry On Cleo and Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey because it lack authenticity, has poorly placed "humour" when it isn't required and only leaves a bad taste in the mouth of the viewers, but most annoyingly is the reliance on typical Hollywood characters, as is played out in the "romantic tension" between Elessar and Arwen in a piss poor "Will they? Won't they?" 🤢
@@elizabethanne8729 I haven't read the books, I've read Silmarillion but not LOTR... so I don't know how Gimli was built up exactly but I think gimli was brilliant in the movies. I mean John Rhys Davies playing him was awesome, but he was strong and swarthy and even though there was some jokes, like when the party was running after the Uruks that took Merry and Pippin and he was bitching about it, I felt the movie needed such levity. Legolas defying gravity and physics moments were annoying but for the casual like myself you're enjoying a fantasy battle, I can suspend my disbelief a little bit further without taking away from the major battle. I do feel robbed that in the movies you see gimli change a little but we don't see those major changes and how they come about, it's more through travel and killing contests his bond with legolas grows. Still, he's my 3rd favourite character behind Sam and Boromir, so I don't think they did him entirely dirty.
@@tomfrost6049 wait so you’ve read the silmarillion, seen the movies, but not read the actual lord of the rings? How? That makes no sense to me. Who would read the silmarillion but not read the lord of the rings?
I'm not necessarily critical of Peter Jackson choosing to leave out certain characters from the book. Eomer takes the place of Elfhelm (an interesting but not really necessary character), and the charge on horseback is much more thematic and epic. Jackson also adds a greater degree of tension between the overly cautious Theoden and the more heroic Aragorn. But it also makes Theoden's final ride in the Battle of the Pelanor fields feel like more of a character a - from feeble man to proud warrior
The film version wouldn't have worked as a book and the book version wouldn't have worked as a film. The film version of Theodan made for more of a redemption story for the Third film, making his part more relevant. The introduction of elves also gives the film a chance to explore the influence of Elrond and Galadriel on Middle Earth which otherwise would have been completely omitted
I agree. His redemption and charge of the Return of the King is epic and one the best cinematic events in history. I really applaud Jackson for giving his character that awesome scene. I cry thinking about it every time.
The whole story of the books was that it was MEN'S time to rule, and the influence of the elves was fading. They wouldn't have had much influence left, especially with their whole leaving the continent AND fighting a war in Lorien.
While I can understand that the way Helm's Deep is portrayed in the film does lessen Theoden as a character I greatly prefer the film version and here is why. Because of the spectacle created is so beautifully done. The scene where Eomer on the crest of the hill shouts "To the King!" to when Gandalf on Shadowfax leaps into battle as the music crescendos is simply breathtakingly beautiful and gives me goosebumps every time I think about it. And yes the Lorien Elves do no appear in the book as they were occupied in Lorien defending their own lands, PJ wanted to show, I think, that all of Middle Earth's habitants were involved in its defense and he could not show the Wars in the North that were happening concurrently. (THAT would make a fantastic stand-alone film that I would most definitely go to see!!) Had PJ not filmed the changed Helm's Deep sequence so masterfully perhaps the character changes would have stood out as huge problems but he nailed it. It is masterfully done!
The book version is my favorite because it gives us my favorite quote "Eomer turned: 'I thank you, Gimli son of Gloin!' he said. 'I did not know that you were with us in this sortie. But oft the unbidden guest proves the best company.' " Not only is this a super dope moment in the books and even though we get the "don't tell the elf" line, the same scene in the movie loses some of its punch for me because Eomer is not there to defend the postern with them and joke with Gimlim but the unbidden guest part is so perfect and one of my favorite lines in all of Tolkien.
I'd like to see a video about the difference of Aragorn. He has a very different demeanor in the books. He feels very differently about his lineage and destiny to be king. He also has (at times) a level or arrogance about his power. Another big difference is he carries anduril the entire story. There are lots of other differences as well. I'd love to see a video
Whether in the battle of helm's deep or in the rest of the movies in general, its a shame how underutilized gimli is as a character in those key scenes, compated to the books
But there IS no unification of the races. At this point in time the elves are just mainly concerned with leaving Middle Earth.They don't WANT men to fail, but since they are folding up camp and leaving they aren't really invested in the success of men either.
Book by far for me. Elves at Helm's Deep ruined that entire section of the movie for me. My kids make fun of me to this day because I still complain about it. And I like some of the side characters like Erkenbrand . They bring a greater scope to the story to give us characters that show heroism that we are not following.
I hate that part too, don't worry. It takes away from the achievements of the Rohirrim. And the fact that Eomer wasn't fighting on the castle walls alongside Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas was a big disappointment...
I like the movie version because of the visuals. The elves showing up was “meh” and didn’t make sense, and I hated the final charge down the hill. Would have been a waste of fine cavalry. Overall, still the highlight battle of all the movies for me.
id like to hear about the defense of osgiliath comparison. apparently the fighting prowess of the men of gondor is shown to be more then what we see in the films.
Good analysis! The way you point out how Theoden is diminished remind me that I thought that about Frodo. The fact that Jackson remove the Tom Bombadil's chapter has some good reasons behind, but the audience does not see the way Frodo takes care of his friends and stand up as the leader of the hobbits showing courage and will (even if Bombadil rescue them). The remaining of the movie Frodo looks like an agonizing hobbit being carried around, because we don´t understand why the other hobbits and some characters look up at him. It would be great to known your opinion about the portrait of Frodo from book to movies.
Don't forget the Barrow Wights were cut out of the movie too and Frodo had a much more important role in saving everyone at that time even though Tom Bombadil actually saved everyone.
@@Enerdhil exactly... I read the books in Spanish, so several characters and places names are different, but I refer precisely to the Barrow Wights events.
Two topics: the radical transformation of Farmir's character in the movies (which I do not like: I love the movies in general, but find myself skipping the parts with Faramir when watching them on DVD, such is my distaste for the film Faramir); the omitting the Scouring of the Shire (here I can see both sides, pro and con).
It has been far too long since I have read the books to make a more fair or objective decision. However the movie depiction is visually stunning and to me it still stands as one of the greatest onscreen battles in cinematic history. The one thing that was a bit unnecessary to me was the inclusion of the Elves. For one, where did they come from and who sent for them that a massive task force was marshalled and arrived in time before the Uruk army did? For another the use of the Elves also robs Men from being the deserved stewards of Middle-Earth and capable of standing alone against evil, without the aid of immortals Elves (who were already fleeing at this time). I think a rekindling of the Last Alliance should have been reserved for the March on the Black Gate, as Men and Elves had done during the Second Age.
Movie helms deep takes it for me. Enjoy it way more than the Book. Although I appreciate what the book does for characters, and how much more detailed it was. The spectacle of the huge on screen battle, mm mm mm
I really appreciate this type of video, compare and contrast. That said, I loved the movies. I knew there were differences, but the spirit of the books was there, so easily forgiven. Unlike the elf/dwarf romance in The Hobbit, that was so annoying.
I personaly like both versions, but from slightly other point of view. The battle from movie is amazing, epic and adorable to watch. For fans lf LOTR it is basicly an orgasm on the screen. And the book version just makes more sence. You can see a strategy there. You understand the reasons much better and you get such a different point of view. You are sympatyzing with Theoden, you know why he is going there and he's a much better leader. Basicly movie had to make the whole battle as simple as possible for one single reason, most of the people are watching films to think about it, but just to relax. So making something, that is not easily understandable is not efficent.
im tied on which version, there both pretty good in different ways. I would love to see a comparison between what really happened at Dol guldur please!! awesome channel and content guys keep it up.x
I personally prefer the movie version. Having the entire population shored up inside gives the battle an extra sense of purpose and desperation. And having the elves enter the battle, bringing the two races, one to the aid of the other is extremely touching.
As much as I love the books, I do prefer the movie. The Uruks seem huge and imposing, but the charge down the hill seems amazing. It’s only shadowed by the charge of the Rohirim. I guess I’m just a sucker for the Charge of the Winged Hussars writ large
The book is mostly better as I prefer Legolas being the one and only elf at Helm's Deep(just one is pretty encouraging), although I do like the idea of mines/dynamite used against Helm's Deep.
i like the elves showing up for the spectacle. however as a thematic thing or a story choice. yeahhhhh not so keen. the point or one of the points of the war of the ring is seeing the strength of men renewed people like Elrond seeing them fit to take on the role of the guardians and masters of middle earth. so to have the elves come and save them sort of negates that whole idea. still looked cool though.
Regardless of its small page count Helms Deep sure seemed like a major climax in the trilogy. As s little kid it takes a long long time to get to Minas Tirith and this battle fills your thoughts during that slow crawl.
Movie version by default as I haven't read the books yet. From what this video has shown me though I do like the changes they made for the movie, as you said too many characters and our attention spans are only so big for a movie. Eomers charge with Gandalf I thought was brilliant and dare I say a bit emotional, Gandalf says "Theodin king stands alone..." and Eomer just rocking up and saying "Not alone" just gives me chills every time. I agree that changing the last final charge from Theodins idea to Aragorn does kind of make him seem weaker however in the broader context, the movie is showing that his people are about to be wiped out and this battle has everything on the line so it's easier to give in to despair. Also this is the story of Aragorn and his rise to take his rightful place as high king, so he has to look stronger than any other man because he's our guy and he inspires everyone else, he manages to take Theodins mind from "I'm about to die and my people in ruin" to "LEEEEEROYYY JENKINS!!!". So I like the movie more by default, once I read the book I may change my mind.
This is one of the times where the movie does it better. I like the idea of Eomer having his moment, riding down the mountain with Gandalf. I like Theoden being a “lesser king” but still doing what is necessary and all he can do until the very end.
the movie depiction is absolutely epic, with some proper OMG moments. The way the outer wall is destroyed, and the wide shots with the ladders was using the medium of film to its advantage in a devastating way.
I'd like to see a video on all the deeds and words attributed to different characters between the book and the films. There's what seems to me a deliberate change in focus which glorifies certain characters at the expense of others. I'd also like to know your opinion of Denethor as portrayed in both film and book as it is my feeling that he is dealt with very poorly in the film adaptation, wereas he is a complex and tragic character in the book and another perspective would be interesting.
Literally the only problem I had was the Elves showing up. I would have liked it better if it was all Rohan. I really feel like it kinda stepped on their moment. But they had a great moment at Pellenor Fields so it's all good.
I think a lot of the creative decisions taken by Jackson and Walsh in the original trilogy all had intent and purpose behind them. Many nods to other characters and moments throughout the books. I think that the elves arriving at helms deep to support Aragorn is a nod to the sons of Elrond who accompanied him along the paths of dead and the subsuming battles
For what it's worth, I don't even 'get' fantasy, yet I find myself here night upon night, coming back again to this channel. I don't even understand half of it, but it's soothing & righteous, so I've allowed it in my life -- thanks.
A really really cool compare and contrast. I never thought of the lead up and importance within the story and how they played out differently, I only looked at the surface level of how the battles were different. Love a video that totally opens my eyes to a perspective I never knew existed
I'l admit i've not read the book, but from what i'm hearing here and the other videos on this channel, i think i might prefer the book variant of the battle.
can't stand the"movies" they are nothing like the books. I walked out when Frodo and Sam started running through a cornfield. the movies are shallow and empty of everything Tolkien.
These movies provided good visuals but the books were so much better. I saw them all at the cinema but was disappointed by the way the story & characters were changed.
Movie version is just brilliant..... I love the other parts of the book like the journey, scenery and the songs but the movie version for the battles is incredible
"Gamling" in Swedish is literally a word for "old person" with a kind of negative clang. So as an early teen when I read the Swedish version of The Lord of the Rings I thought it was a mean nickname for one of the generals 😅 it wasn't until I saw the films I realised it was his actual name
That Hobbit movie burn around 9:50 nearly slayed me, I'm laughing so hard. I love the movie Helm's Deep sequence, it was very epic, but I do miss how much Eomer we get in the books and how he works so well with Aragorn. We don't really get that in the movies. Am I misremembering, I thought Edoras got attacked by wargs during the day sometime before this battle? Anyway, great video, thank you!
I think that while the Battle in the movie looks epic, the Battle (and why/when it happened) in the books makes more sense. For example, why would Theoden move all the civilians CLOSER to the enemy, and to the location he is going to fight a battle at that? If he wanted to send the civilians away from Edoras then Dunharrow/Firienfield (is it called?) is nearer and harder for the enemy to get to in large numbers. Also that cavalry charge looks absolutely great, but they are charging heavy infantry with long pikes, it wouldn't work. They probably couldn't charge down a slope that steep anyway. I asume you are supposed to attribute both to Gandalf and the sunlight? In the books the reinforcements charge from behind the enemy don't they?
Loved the video and would be very interested to see a comparison of the events in the mines of morea in the books and the film. Again love the vids keep up the good work!
It had been about two years since I last read the books when this movie came out but ,some of the differences I noticed most were the ones at helms deep. There are lots of reasons why elves didn't show up. And Theoden was healed by Galdalf and was a big hero and led the charge through the gate.
Make a video about the differences between The movie and book versions of not Just the Battle of Minas Tirith but the others leading up to It, like the siege and battle of Osgiliath that had been going on for so long to their attack on the Pelennor Fields before the Rohirrim did it!
I don’t mind the movie version, but it does kind of feel like the elves are always having to come to everyone’s rescue. I think if you left everything else the same but removed the elves (especially since they don’t do anything else after the battle) it would be better.
Watched the movies some five times, my fav movie is the 2 towers, now im reading the books, and reading the book and seeing how different it is from the movie is like reading a totally new stories but with some visual help in the imagination. I still think that the movies are good, but the books is ofc more detailed and is awesome too.
Great comparisons. I'll always love the movie scenes but I can't wait to read it for myself in the books. In keeping with Rohan I'd like to see more of Eomer, and also the differences with the army of the dead from book and film.
As much as I love the movies the Battle For Middle Earth felt really compartmentalized. You don't feel the vastness and see the multiple fronts it was being fought on. We get to see the siege of Helms Deep and it feels like the whole war will be lost there when Rohan was a huge country. Only information we even get about the war is in the Return of The King extended edition when Gimli says he wish he had a legion of dwarves and Legolas tells him they're occupied fighting their own battles against Sauron at the moment.
Also I love how in the book version it's Theodens idea(not Aragorns) to charge out with the dawn. Aragorn spends most of that conversation trying to think of how to get theoden to safety, only to see Theoden selflessly sacrifice himself so his people can escape through the caves. I feel like this sort of teaches Aragorn a little bit about what it means to be a King
Kings are tyrants. All of them. The end.
But I See your point. Good take.
@@cegesh1459 I see your point but this being TH-cam I'm going to need to break it down to a quantum level lol: only a sith deals in absolutes. Kings are people and As people they are a mixed bag of mostly bad with Some okay, and even a bad king can do good things (and vice versa)
Also, this is LotR. The only morally grey realistic-ISH monarch is Denethor. Everyone else is there to serve as a heroic figure to stand against Saurons horde of cannibal monsters, which by comparison make most people look pretty alright, king or otherwise
Nice observation and point.👍
@@cegesh1459 and democracy can be just as tyrannical. Perhaps even worse in its extreme.
And i love the counting battle which already has began between legolas and gimmli in the book. But at the end for me the film idea was more epic
One of my favorite passages in the book is when Aragorn stood up on the wall in parley and warned the Army of Saruman that they had little time left because the dawn was coming. It was one of many times that Aragorn seemed to say prophetic things.
Was disappointed they did not have that scene when I first saw the movie, one of my favorites in the book.
Books will always be better.
But the scene of helms deep is one of the greatest scenes in the history of movies.
fax machine saying facts
Disagree, the special effects in helms deep beats your imagination easy!
I mean PFFT! When i read this my imagination at best was the old cartoon quality! Lol
I had never heard of LoTR when I reluctantly walked into the theater with my dad to watch The Two Towers. To be honest, I thought the movie sounded a little bit nerdy when he explained the basic story to me. I just wanted to hang out with my dad and have a guys night out. It completely blew my mind. I had absolutely no idea what was going on and I was rediculously confused most of the time, but I didn't care. I was on the edge of my seat the entire time. It will always be my favorite movie of all time. It's a masterpiece to me.
Actually no
For me books were sometimes really boring and movies not, and some scenes are better in movies than in the books like death of Boromir
YESSS - *"Yes. Yes! The horn of Helm Hammerhand shall sound in the deep, one last time!"*
Forth Helmingaaaas!
ELENDIL!!!
Book Battle of Helm's Deep - the elves showing up makes less and less sense the more you dig into the lore. Theoden's character is flattened, draining the fullness of his healing by Gandalf.
My opinion I like seeing the elves
Agreed. I sat in the movie theater thinking it didn't make sense at all.
It was supposed to be Rangers; Aragon's kinsmen, the Dunedain of the North
I can totally understand and wanting the movie to be more like the book, but also how Peter Jackson made the battle of the Hornburg more of an iconic and unforgettable scene from working with just a few pages is beyond genuine!
Also for Hollywood purposes when you see the elves reinforcements out of nowhere it got me so pumped as a little kid back in the day, (still does)! Just my two cents!
I’d argue that movie didn’t have the time to even set up the context of why the elves showing up wouldn’t make sense, so for the purposes of the movie, I think we are to assume that that context isn’t applicable, making the inclusion of the elves acceptable.
In the end, for an adaptation, it’s better to do something that doesn’t make sense BECAUSE you’re familiar with the source material than it is to do something that doesn’t make sense UNLESS you’re familiar with the source material, so long as you maintain the adaptation’s own internal consistency.
An adaptation needs to be able to stand on its own, and I think it’s safe to say the The Lord of the Rings movies largely succeeded in that, even if things are inconsistent with the books.
Book. For all his talk about “men” Peter Jackson always undermines the greatest triumphs of men in LOTR
Yeah, he has some kind of a boner for elves, that is super apparent...
As much as I like the films and most of the changes, I didn't care much for the elves appearing in it. I prefer the book.
I love the movie version, but I really wish the elves wouldn’t have shown up. It truly takes away from the feeling of “this is men, backs against the wall with everything to loose and still fighting to the last.” I would love to see more of the elves, but this isn’t the Last Alliance. This was men fighting tooth and nail for their own survival (and that of the women and children) against insurmountable odds.
If a company of elves shows up, might as well have had Saruman's forces supported by Gundam mecha robots countered by Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli piloting Evas. 🙄🙄🙄🙄
Agreed
I think it was a nice touch. It harkened back to the last alliance,as the last of the free peoples in the mark fight against evil.
@@skelo9033
Then Tolkien would have changed the first alliance's name to The Penultimate Alliance of Elves and Men.
Yeah, for me that was the stupidest thing in the whole movie. Helm's Deep was about the struggles of men, not elves. And I hated how Eomer was relegated to just a small side part in the movies...
I don't normally comment on TH-cam videos but I wanted to say a bit about this. I'm somewhat disappointed in your summary of the book battle. The nature of the battle is different from in the movie. wonder if your summary of the book battle was influenced by the movie battle. This is my favorite moment in the books so I would like to explain how I view the battle and Tolkein's telling of it.
In the movie, Helm's Deep resembles a castle fortress. In the book, it is a massive geographical feature in which men have constructed various fortifications. Importantly, it consists of a narrow gorge leading to the Hornburg, and in this gorge is a massive cave system. The reader is made aware of the folk knowledge that "No foe has ever taken the Hornburg if men defended it." Nobody mentions why that is, but we're about to find out. During the battle, many of Rohan's forces are forced back into the cave system, where it is estimated that they can survive and hold out for a long time. Saruman's forces continue deeper and deeper into the valley, eventually reaching the Hornburg. At this point it appears all is lost, and Theoden decides to ride out and die fighting. The Hornburg sounds its namesake instrument, which echoes throughout Helm's Deep. While Theoden has his moment of glory, Rohan's forces in the caves, which are now behind and surrounding Saruman's forces, also sound their horns and attack. It is only now that the reader can understand the defensive strength of Helm's Deep, the purpose of the Hornburg, and the reason that it has never fallen while men defend it. The giant horn serves as a signal to forces in the cave system, allowing a coordinated, devastating attack on any army that reaches the Hornburg; an army that now finds itself surrounded. It is a huge moment to suddenly grasp the folk wisdom about Helm's Deep and the reason for the Hornburg's construction, wisdom that was lost and has been found again, all while something awakens in the kingdoms of men and they rise to fight Sauron.
Tolkien didn't write a lengthy military treatise on this battle. He writes it in a simple way. However, after being involved in 2 world wars and studying the folk stories of countless historic battles, he could not have been oblivious to the tactical details of this chapter. I think he intended there to be a theme in this battle about folk knowledge. Helm's Deep itself is named after a legendary warrior Helm Hammerhand, and in Theoden's moment of glory, the men rally and shout "Helm! Helm is arisen and back to war!" The understanding of Helm's Deep had been lost to time, and all that remained was folk knowledge in the form of "The Hornburg has never fallen to assault" Throughout this chapter we rediscover the lost truth behind that folk knowledge, and nothing could be more Tolkien than that.
Of course there are other themes and significant parts to this chapter, but those are well represented in the movie. If you read this whole thing then I thank you. It's just my opinion about my favorite chapter in Tolkien's work.
Fun fact: Gamling roughly translates to "old man" in Swedish! 👍
The scouring of the shire was one of my bigger disappointments in the movie, but I understand that time is an issue.
That was one of my favorite parts in the last book. I was disappointed we didn't get to see it in the movie but I understood the timing issue.
@@AudraT Could have been another entire movie. The four returning Hobbits plus some new charactors, and some old charactors (from the book) like Tom Cotton, Farmer Maggot and Rosie revisited and expanded. It would be a bit difficult to bring in the now powerless Saruman, but could be worked in and around, since the non extended version of the movie didn't show his death. Could be made long enough with some of the events of the 4 years before Frodo leaves for the Havens, too.
For me that was very boring moment in books and Im happy that it was cut from movies
Completely anticlimactic for a movie, the final boss was already beaten
I prefer the book version for 2 main reasons:
The elf army should not have been involved, and the Hourns and Ents were key and should have played a big role in the film.
Agreed. It was a tragedy how the Ents & Hourns were portrayed. The Elves showing up all the way from Rivendell to help defend Helm's Deep made no sense
And the elf who led them in the movie (Haldir) was not from Rivendell, he was from Lorien, and was busy defending Lorien from attack from Dol Goldie.
Goldur not Goldie, sorry for error.
Your reasons for preferring the book is that the film isn’t the exact same as the book😂
they were there, in the movie, just have to watch the extended edition to see them
The battle for Helms Deep is my favourite part of all 3 films. So much I've made a model of it for 28mm wargaming.(it's huge) I know the elves didn't come in the book but i do really like the costumes for them.
Oh I'm jealous of that
Yeah, the fighting at Osgiliath and Minas Tirith in ROTK felt flat by comparison. For me this was mostly because the Gondor soldiers look utterly incompetent and pathetic. They're supposed to be professionals, yet they get their asses handed to them, even in one-on-one fights, against poorly equipped orcs half their size! While this is fantasy, one of my biggest gripes in these or historical films, is armour is almost always useless in movies, when in reality it worked very well. Even if they were a bunch of moronic incompetents, the Gondorian soldiers still should have been practically invulnerable in full-plate armour, except when overwhelmed by sheer numbers or getting whacked by a troll's hammer!
@@legionarybooks13 ye I'm not much of a fan of ROTK. The part where pippin and gandalf are on the wall as a siege tower disgorges it's orcs and gandalf is just clubbing orcs with his blade and staff and they just die instantly with a bonk. He wallops one in the neck with his sword and don't even brake the skin XD . Not like helms deep where Aragon is chopping off legs and running uruks through. Probably the best scene of the 3 films is Boromir's last stand where he fights with arrows striking out of him then Aragon's duel with Lurtz.
@@L0rdslashstab, ROTK felt anticlimactic, in part because how awesome the Battle of Helms Deep was in the second film. Had the Gondorian soldiers just shown a shred of competency, making it appear that it is numbers alone that overwhelmed them, it would have worked so much better. And yeah, Helms Deep definitely had a more realistic, gritty feel to it. The fighting between the elves / men and Uruks was brutal. One part that always got to me was when the Uruk ram breaches the gate and it impales one of the Rohan soldiers. Savage.
@@legionarybooks13 rofl ye and the guy bashes his head on the gate as the uruks pull the pike back XD and Theoden stabs an uruk in the face with a spear XD it's awesome.
It is difficult to pick a favorite version when each holds its place in its own venue. I thoroughly enjoyed the books and I particularly preferred the idea that the King would lead and army to divert an enemy from the people -- elderly, women, and children -- in order to keep them safe. I agree that the wisdom of the King is tarnished by the movie version, but I can also see the reasons behind the movie-folks reasons for the change. There is a big difference between holding the attention of a reader of a book and enticing them to invest in the next book in the trilogy, and holding the attention and interest of a movie-goer and enticing them to invest in the sequel. Comparing the way a story is presented in a book as opposed to how it is presented in a movie is much like comparing apples and oranges -- two different venues, two different audiences; thus most often two different opinions.
I absolutely love the books. But the movie version of this battle was just so epic!
I was wondering when will you reupload this great video, we need more this book vs movie videos, just keep going!!!!!!
I like how Jackson didn’t ruin things with his changes. They work. It kind of bothered me how they created a female elf in the Hobbit that wasn’t in the book. It’s one thing to change scenes. It’s another to completely add a new character not in the lore. The extended editions of the trilogy is definitely the way to go.
I didn't mind Tariel as a character, but the whole love story with her and Kili (or was it Fili?) was so monumentally STUPID, even Evangeline Lilly has openly expressed her disgust towards it. My only other issues with her and Legolas was they had way too much screen time. It would make sense for Legolas to have a cameo, as he is Thranduil's son. I assume he's not mentioned in the book, because Tolkien probably hadn't created him yet in 1937. But it should have been a cameo, like when they ambush the dwarves in Mirkwood, and left at that. Plus Legolas and Tariel are so overpowered, there's never any tension when they're fighting the orcs. I did see a fan edit that cuts the bloated 8 1/2 hour Hobbit trilogy and streamlines to a more manageable 3 hours, 45 minutes, making it far more enjoyable, and more in line with the book.
They actuslly shot Arwen fighting at Helms deep but edited it out, you can see this in the behind the scenes documentaries from the extended editions.
@@legionarybooks13 In the last two Hobbit movies, Jackson was clearly trying to replicate Aragorn and Arwen's love story from LOTR. Two problems with that: 1. the love story isn't in the book so it's not going to feel organic, natural, or important to the story because it literally can't be. 2. He made it into a love triangle which was even more unnecessary.
I'll defend adding Legolas to the movies. I've read that Tolkien wanted to make another edition of The Hobbit where he'd retroactively go back and add Legolas in certain parts but died before he could ever write it. I'll fully agree with you that Legolas being a video game character was really stupid haha.
Lurtz was added to the fellowship of the ring. Misogyny is un befitting for middle earth.
@@spencerkindra8822, I didn't know that about Tolkien wanting to go back and add him in. I love the charcter, both in book and film, and think Orlando Bloom played it perfectly. But yeah, he was too "videogame-ish" even in the LOTR films. Doing his Super Mario impression in the Hobbit just left me groaning.
The love triangle was also really stupid because it stemmed from a really lame dick joke. Plus, elves and dwarves HATED each other. That's why Legolas and Gimli's friendship was so special. Same as was when Galadriel gave Gimli three strands of her hair; something she denied her creepy uncle, Feanor, a few thousand years earlier!
The SHADE towards the Hobbit movies 🤣🤣🤣🤣I LOVE YOU GUYS
Yes!
Despite how much I love the movies, there are some things about the Helms Deep battle that irk me... Legolas surfboarding on a shield down the steps while using his bow. Aragon and Gimli throwing themselves into certain danger against a large oncoming swath of orcs. But I do love the feel and sense of dread the movie gives off that feel straight from the books.
I was so very excited at the prospect of the films, however I had not thought that such liberties would be taken. Jackson almost destroyed my love of the story, and this is before seeing Gimli turned into a comedy side note.
@@dambrooks7578 yeah I felt like the movies kinda did Gimli dirty.
@@elizabethanne8729 I left my first time reading of the LOTR so enamoured for how strongly Gimli was able to confront and deal with the contradictions in his life and evolve into more, the film just took the lazy option too many times for me to feel happy watching it. I understand it had to be converted into mass appeal, but it often feels as if it is little more than a poorly edited mix of Gladiator, Carry On Cleo and Bill & Ted's Bogus Journey because it lack authenticity, has poorly placed "humour" when it isn't required and only leaves a bad taste in the mouth of the viewers, but most annoyingly is the reliance on typical Hollywood characters, as is played out in the "romantic tension" between Elessar and Arwen in a piss poor "Will they? Won't they?" 🤢
@@elizabethanne8729 I haven't read the books, I've read Silmarillion but not LOTR... so I don't know how Gimli was built up exactly but I think gimli was brilliant in the movies. I mean John Rhys Davies playing him was awesome, but he was strong and swarthy and even though there was some jokes, like when the party was running after the Uruks that took Merry and Pippin and he was bitching about it, I felt the movie needed such levity.
Legolas defying gravity and physics moments were annoying but for the casual like myself you're enjoying a fantasy battle, I can suspend my disbelief a little bit further without taking away from the major battle.
I do feel robbed that in the movies you see gimli change a little but we don't see those major changes and how they come about, it's more through travel and killing contests his bond with legolas grows.
Still, he's my 3rd favourite character behind Sam and Boromir, so I don't think they did him entirely dirty.
@@tomfrost6049 wait so you’ve read the silmarillion, seen the movies, but not read the actual lord of the rings? How? That makes no sense to me. Who would read the silmarillion but not read the lord of the rings?
Do Gimli book Vs film. He is a valued member of the team in the book and a comic relief in the films.
It was a shame the way the Dwarves are portrayed in these films
@@freebirdallen very true and why I can't tolerate the Hobbit films.
I'm not necessarily critical of Peter Jackson choosing to leave out certain characters from the book. Eomer takes the place of Elfhelm (an interesting but not really necessary character), and the charge on horseback is much more thematic and epic. Jackson also adds a greater degree of tension between the overly cautious Theoden and the more heroic Aragorn. But it also makes Theoden's final ride in the Battle of the Pelanor fields feel like more of a character a - from feeble man to proud warrior
I would like to see the differences between the Shelob section of the story, along with all character differences, especially Faramir and Legolas
In the book Aragorns kinfolk, rangers of the north come to the aid of rohan. Not many, but every bit of help is help indeed.
Actually the Rangers of the north didn't arrive until after the Battle of Helm's Deep
The film version wouldn't have worked as a book and the book version wouldn't have worked as a film. The film version of Theodan made for more of a redemption story for the Third film, making his part more relevant. The introduction of elves also gives the film a chance to explore the influence of Elrond and Galadriel on Middle Earth which otherwise would have been completely omitted
I agree. His redemption and charge of the Return of the King is epic and one the best cinematic events in history. I really applaud Jackson for giving his character that awesome scene. I cry thinking about it every time.
The whole story of the books was that it was MEN'S time to rule, and the influence of the elves was fading. They wouldn't have had much influence left, especially with their whole leaving the continent AND fighting a war in Lorien.
While I can understand that the way Helm's Deep is portrayed in the film does lessen Theoden as a character I greatly prefer the film version and here is why. Because of the spectacle created is so beautifully done. The scene where Eomer on the crest of the hill shouts "To the King!" to when Gandalf on Shadowfax leaps into battle as the music crescendos is simply breathtakingly beautiful and gives me goosebumps every time I think about it. And yes the Lorien Elves do no appear in the book as they were occupied in Lorien defending their own lands, PJ wanted to show, I think, that all of Middle Earth's habitants were involved in its defense and he could not show the Wars in the North that were happening concurrently. (THAT would make a fantastic stand-alone film that I would most definitely go to see!!) Had PJ not filmed the changed Helm's Deep sequence so masterfully perhaps the character changes would have stood out as huge problems but he nailed it. It is masterfully done!
Dropping the 'Scouring of the Shire' from the movie is my biggest gripe with the movie. This actually the true culmination of the story.
It is?? Not the final destruction of the One Ring? Okay. Not.
The book version is my favorite because it gives us my favorite quote "Eomer turned: 'I thank you, Gimli son of Gloin!' he said. 'I did not know that you were with us in this sortie. But oft the unbidden guest proves the best company.' " Not only is this a super dope moment in the books and even though we get the "don't tell the elf" line, the same scene in the movie loses some of its punch for me because Eomer is not there to defend the postern with them and joke with Gimlim but the unbidden guest part is so perfect and one of my favorite lines in all of Tolkien.
I'd like to see a video about the difference of Aragorn. He has a very different demeanor in the books. He feels very differently about his lineage and destiny to be king. He also has (at times) a level or arrogance about his power. Another big difference is he carries anduril the entire story. There are lots of other differences as well. I'd love to see a video
I love when he nearly fights the Edoras guards himself and gandalfs laughs it off to save them.
‘Crazy old men and their love of their swords’
Yeah. He doesn't doubt himself at all. He is impatient to get the sword and become king so he can wed Arwen
The Book Helm's Deep is the only correct rendition of the battle.
Whether in the battle of helm's deep or in the rest of the movies in general, its a shame how underutilized gimli is as a character in those key scenes, compated to the books
Movie Helm's Deep, far more dramatic and shows the unification of the races.
But there IS no unification of the races. At this point in time the elves are just mainly concerned with leaving Middle Earth.They don't WANT men to fail, but since they are folding up camp and leaving they aren't really invested in the success of men either.
Book by far for me. Elves at Helm's Deep ruined that entire section of the movie for me. My kids make fun of me to this day because I still complain about it. And I like some of the side characters like Erkenbrand . They bring a greater scope to the story to give us characters that show heroism that we are not following.
I hate that part too, don't worry. It takes away from the achievements of the Rohirrim. And the fact that Eomer wasn't fighting on the castle walls alongside Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas was a big disappointment...
I'd prefer the book, for it shows the wisdom of the king of Rohan, rather than seen in the movie.
I like the movie version because of the visuals. The elves showing up was “meh” and didn’t make sense, and I hated the final charge down the hill. Would have been a waste of fine cavalry. Overall, still the highlight battle of all the movies for me.
The book because it just feels more right.
id like to hear about the defense of osgiliath comparison. apparently the fighting prowess of the men of gondor is shown to be more then what we see in the films.
Please stop begging for subscribers and likes. It is annoying and probably hurts.
Good analysis! The way you point out how Theoden is diminished remind me that I thought that about Frodo. The fact that Jackson remove the Tom Bombadil's chapter has some good reasons behind, but the audience does not see the way Frodo takes care of his friends and stand up as the leader of the hobbits showing courage and will (even if Bombadil rescue them). The remaining of the movie Frodo looks like an agonizing hobbit being carried around, because we don´t understand why the other hobbits and some characters look up at him. It would be great to known your opinion about the portrait of Frodo from book to movies.
Don't forget the Barrow Wights were cut out of the movie too and Frodo had a much more important role in saving everyone at that time even though Tom Bombadil actually saved everyone.
@@Enerdhil exactly... I read the books in Spanish, so several characters and places names are different, but I refer precisely to the Barrow Wights events.
Two topics: the radical transformation of Farmir's character in the movies (which I do not like: I love the movies in general, but find myself skipping the parts with Faramir when watching them on DVD, such is my distaste for the film Faramir); the omitting the Scouring of the Shire (here I can see both sides, pro and con).
Book Helm's Deep. Not that the movie isn't bad or anything.
While the film version looked epic it is not close to the book one ! So Book Helms Deep for me.
I like both versions of the battle of helm deeps. It was epic.
I think the elves coming to the aid of man should have been saved for the final battle at the black gate in return of the king.
Amen to that. That would've been awesome!
Battle of the Hornburg in the Book is obviously far superior as it doesn't require invented cinema tricks to make it interesting.
It has been far too long since I have read the books to make a more fair or objective decision. However the movie depiction is visually stunning and to me it still stands as one of the greatest onscreen battles in cinematic history.
The one thing that was a bit unnecessary to me was the inclusion of the Elves. For one, where did they come from and who sent for them that a massive task force was marshalled and arrived in time before the Uruk army did?
For another the use of the Elves also robs Men from being the deserved stewards of Middle-Earth and capable of standing alone against evil, without the aid of immortals Elves (who were already fleeing at this time).
I think a rekindling of the Last Alliance should have been reserved for the March on the Black Gate, as Men and Elves had done during the Second Age.
Movie helms deep takes it for me. Enjoy it way more than the Book. Although I appreciate what the book does for characters, and how much more detailed it was. The spectacle of the huge on screen battle, mm mm mm
I really appreciate this type of video, compare and contrast. That said, I loved the movies. I knew there were differences, but the spirit of the books was there, so easily forgiven. Unlike the elf/dwarf romance in The Hobbit, that was so annoying.
OMG perfect timing I was just looking for this. Thank you so much.
Build me a garden worthy of Mordor.
I personaly like both versions, but from slightly other point of view.
The battle from movie is amazing, epic and adorable to watch. For fans lf LOTR it is basicly an orgasm on the screen.
And the book version just makes more sence. You can see a strategy there. You understand the reasons much better and you get such a different point of view. You are sympatyzing with Theoden, you know why he is going there and he's a much better leader.
Basicly movie had to make the whole battle as simple as possible for one single reason, most of the people are watching films to think about it, but just to relax. So making something, that is not easily understandable is not efficent.
I know there difference, I do believe that the difference are due to different format. To me they are both great for their format!
im tied on which version, there both pretty good in different ways. I would love to see a comparison between what really happened at Dol guldur please!! awesome channel and content guys keep it up.x
I personally prefer the movie version. Having the entire population shored up inside gives the battle an extra sense of purpose and desperation. And having the elves enter the battle, bringing the two races, one to the aid of the other is extremely touching.
As much as I love the books, I do prefer the movie. The Uruks seem huge and imposing, but the charge down the hill seems amazing. It’s only shadowed by the charge of the Rohirim. I guess I’m just a sucker for the Charge of the Winged Hussars writ large
Then the winged hussars arrived!
The book is mostly better as I prefer Legolas being the one and only elf at Helm's Deep(just one is pretty encouraging), although I do like the idea of mines/dynamite used against Helm's Deep.
Book Helms Deep. Eomer was better in the book. No Legolas surfing. Theodon was a better king in the books.
Book- by far- over movie!!!! Movie totally strips Theoden King of his Glory
I'd like to see differnce about Legolas from books and Legolas from movies. Also great video about one of the best battles on Tv history.
i like the elves showing up for the spectacle. however as a thematic thing or a story choice. yeahhhhh not so keen. the point or one of the points of the war of the ring is seeing the strength of men renewed people like Elrond seeing them fit to take on the role of the guardians and masters of middle earth. so to have the elves come and save them sort of negates that whole idea. still looked cool though.
Book Helm's Deep. Even though I saw the movies first and love them to death, I love how the books are so much more detailed and quite different.
Regardless of its small page count Helms Deep sure seemed like a major climax in the trilogy. As s little kid it takes a long long time to get to Minas Tirith and this battle fills your thoughts during that slow crawl.
Movie version by default as I haven't read the books yet. From what this video has shown me though I do like the changes they made for the movie, as you said too many characters and our attention spans are only so big for a movie. Eomers charge with Gandalf I thought was brilliant and dare I say a bit emotional, Gandalf says "Theodin king stands alone..." and Eomer just rocking up and saying "Not alone" just gives me chills every time.
I agree that changing the last final charge from Theodins idea to Aragorn does kind of make him seem weaker however in the broader context, the movie is showing that his people are about to be wiped out and this battle has everything on the line so it's easier to give in to despair. Also this is the story of Aragorn and his rise to take his rightful place as high king, so he has to look stronger than any other man because he's our guy and he inspires everyone else, he manages to take Theodins mind from "I'm about to die and my people in ruin" to "LEEEEEROYYY JENKINS!!!".
So I like the movie more by default, once I read the book I may change my mind.
Movie Helm's Deep has really good pacing
This is one of the times where the movie does it better. I like the idea of Eomer having his moment, riding down the mountain with Gandalf. I like Theoden being a “lesser king” but still doing what is necessary and all he can do until the very end.
the movie depiction is absolutely epic, with some proper OMG moments. The way the outer wall is destroyed, and the wide shots with the ladders was using the medium of film to its advantage in a devastating way.
I'd like to see a video on all the deeds and words attributed to different characters between the book and the films. There's what seems to me a deliberate change in focus which glorifies certain characters at the expense of others. I'd also like to know your opinion of Denethor as portrayed in both film and book as it is my feeling that he is dealt with very poorly in the film adaptation, wereas he is a complex and tragic character in the book and another perspective would be interesting.
Rohan has no elves. Rohan needs no elves.
Literally the only problem I had was the Elves showing up. I would have liked it better if it was all Rohan. I really feel like it kinda stepped on their moment. But they had a great moment at Pellenor Fields so it's all good.
I'm normally Pro-Book, but I actually like the movie version better.
I prefer the book version of the battle of helms deep and the entire trilogy
I think a lot of the creative decisions taken by Jackson and Walsh in the original trilogy all had intent and purpose behind them. Many nods to other characters and moments throughout the books.
I think that the elves arriving at helms deep to support Aragorn is a nod to the sons of Elrond who accompanied him along the paths of dead and the subsuming battles
The book vrs makes more sense, but the movie vrs is objectively more epic
For what it's worth, I don't even 'get' fantasy, yet I find myself here night upon night, coming back again to this channel. I don't even understand half of it, but it's soothing & righteous, so I've allowed it in my life -- thanks.
Tolkien's fantasy reads like actual history. Maybe that is part of the appeal.
A really really cool compare and contrast. I never thought of the lead up and importance within the story and how they played out differently, I only looked at the surface level of how the battles were different. Love a video that totally opens my eyes to a perspective I never knew existed
I'l admit i've not read the book, but from what i'm hearing here and the other videos on this channel, i think i might prefer the book variant of the battle.
can't stand the"movies" they are nothing like the books. I walked out when Frodo and Sam started running through a cornfield. the movies are shallow and empty of everything Tolkien.
These movies provided good visuals but the books were so much better. I saw them all at the cinema but was disappointed by the way the story & characters were changed.
The book version is excellent and fits well with the narrative. The movie version is epic and the best action sequences in the trilogy!
The book helms deep Is my favorite part of the lotr books
Movie version is just brilliant..... I love the other parts of the book like the journey, scenery and the songs but the movie version for the battles is incredible
"Gamling" in Swedish is literally a word for "old person" with a kind of negative clang. So as an early teen when I read the Swedish version of The Lord of the Rings I thought it was a mean nickname for one of the generals 😅 it wasn't until I saw the films I realised it was his actual name
That Hobbit movie burn around 9:50 nearly slayed me, I'm laughing so hard. I love the movie Helm's Deep sequence, it was very epic, but I do miss how much Eomer we get in the books and how he works so well with Aragorn. We don't really get that in the movies. Am I misremembering, I thought Edoras got attacked by wargs during the day sometime before this battle? Anyway, great video, thank you!
While reading it , i got goosebumps when one of the soldiers scream " Anduril goes to war "
I just start the hobbit book and im extremely surprised how much they change thing from the book and never heard of
I still don't know how they got 3 long movies out of The Hobbit.
I think that while the Battle in the movie looks epic, the Battle (and why/when it happened) in the books makes more sense. For example, why would Theoden move all the civilians CLOSER to the enemy, and to the location he is going to fight a battle at that? If he wanted to send the civilians away from Edoras then Dunharrow/Firienfield (is it called?) is nearer and harder for the enemy to get to in large numbers. Also that cavalry charge looks absolutely great, but they are charging heavy infantry with long pikes, it wouldn't work. They probably couldn't charge down a slope that steep anyway. I asume you are supposed to attribute both to Gandalf and the sunlight? In the books the reinforcements charge from behind the enemy don't they?
Loved the video and would be very interested to see a comparison of the events in the mines of morea in the books and the film. Again love the vids keep up the good work!
first "first" comment!
It had been about two years since I last read the books when this movie came out but ,some of the differences I noticed most were the ones at helms deep. There are lots of reasons why elves didn't show up. And Theoden was healed by Galdalf and was a big hero and led the charge through the gate.
Make a video about the differences between The movie and book versions of not Just the Battle of Minas Tirith but the others leading up to It, like the siege and battle of Osgiliath that had been going on for so long to their attack on the Pelennor Fields before the Rohirrim did it!
I would love to see a BVM on Balrogs and other creatures in the lore
the book version is excellent but the fantastic visuals and practical effects in the movies are unbeatable
This is possibly the only scene I prefer in the films; not plot wise, but just through raw feeling and emotion. It's unforgettably directed.
I was so mad when I was a kid wondering why the hell Legolas did not just headshot the runner. XD
You mean the Olympic Torch Bearer?🤪🤣😂
@@Enerdhil yes!!! Lol
The movie version is absolutely legendary
I don’t mind the movie version, but it does kind of feel like the elves are always having to come to everyone’s rescue. I think if you left everything else the same but removed the elves (especially since they don’t do anything else after the battle) it would be better.
Yay!
Watched the movies some five times, my fav movie is the 2 towers, now im reading the books, and reading the book and seeing how different it is from the movie is like reading a totally new stories but with some visual help in the imagination.
I still think that the movies are good, but the books is ofc more detailed and is awesome too.
The Movie battle amazing and badass but I prefer the book version better character development and story telling.
Great comparisons. I'll always love the movie scenes but I can't wait to read it for myself in the books. In keeping with Rohan I'd like to see more of Eomer, and also the differences with the army of the dead from book and film.
Faramir meeting frodo and Sam.
As much as I love the movies the Battle For Middle Earth felt really compartmentalized. You don't feel the vastness and see the multiple fronts it was being fought on. We get to see the siege of Helms Deep and it feels like the whole war will be lost there when Rohan was a huge country. Only information we even get about the war is in the Return of The King extended edition when Gimli says he wish he had a legion of dwarves and Legolas tells him they're occupied fighting their own battles against Sauron at the moment.