cowsaysboo Peter Jackson was an idiot who thought that Tolkien published the story as three books, when in reality it was published as three VOLUMES due to a paper shortage at the time. There were SIX books. If Jackson had made the story as a film series rather than insisting on a Trilogy, it could have been six movies that were 2 hours long. And you could have added even more detail in the extended editions that was not material to the plot, like the songs, and other scenes which we're not essential but added much to the story, like Pippin meeting with Beregond and Bergil etc.
Wow, you really don't know anything about Peter Jackson. He's as much a fan of Tolkien as you are, probably more. And of course he knew how many books there were. He'd read them since he was a kid, doofus. Try finding things out before you act like an ass next time.
I think that feeling of "end already" is because there are some shots where it wouldn't surprise to start seeing the credits roll: After Frodo and Sam are on the top of the mountain that the screen fades out, it fades out in a way that feels like the movie is over. After the coronation of Aragorn, the zoom out looks like something that could be the last shot of the movie. ... and finally, there is the real ending.
A lot of people think Elijah Woods is “boring”, but I think no one could have played the role of Frodo Baggins better, it seems like he truly understands his character.
No, Peter Jackson understands his character. This is the result of fantastic directing. He knew exactly how to portray Frodo in each scene and communicated that to Elijah. That said, Elijah was a great actor for this part.
Honestly, Frodo is boring in the books, easily the least interesting of the Hobbits. Jackson did his best to make him interesting and I believe he did q great job. Elijah Wood was great too. He captured Frodo's innocence and pure soul well and also his slow fall into irreparable depression. But I guess some people don't like innocence, purity or weakness.
@SnoopyDoo I think you can have plot without story, but you can't have story without plot, even if the plot is a mere moment like making eye contact that two characters understand. But think about it, most sitcoms etc have plot without story, nothing changes as the show goes on and everything is cleanly wrapped up in 30 minutes and never influences them again.
So basically The plot is the external events and conflicts The story is the internal events, changes and conflicts that happens because of the plot Did i get it right?
That’s what he’s saying, but no. Usually screenplays are taught and thought about in the opposite way. Story is simply the events that unfold, and plot is the emotional turns. What he means is character “want” vs “need”.
that music playing when gandalf goes and draws back the nazgul so the men can make it to minas tirith is an amazing moment. really the entire trilogy is comprised of epic shots and epic musical scores
It's one of those rare performances that's so good it becomes impossible to separate the actor from the role. His career actually kind of suffered because of just how good he is in this.
So glad to find people who really enjoyed the ending of ROTK. And honestly, after investing in a 9 hour epic, I expect a satisfying ending for all characters and plot points.
THIS! After efery awesome story with awesome world, i always wanted to know what happen to the character there, as i assume what possibly happen to them, because they are alive and continue to live
There's a legend saying: everytime you mention LoTR, someone goes for a LoTR extended cut marathon. Also, i don't need to see the scene with "you bow to no one", just brief mentioning of this and a goddamn ninja with his onions materializes
Ive never really understood why everyone talks about crying at the "you bow to no one" scene. its a very powerful scene, but I never found it emotional. I cry at the character moments on mount doom and at the Grey Havens.
I don't agree that the extended editions are the best. They're better in some instances, but some of the stuff in there really is kinda crappy. It's totally understandable why Jackson cut some of that stuff. Some of the added scenes actually ruin the flow, giving away info that sucks the tension and excitement out of later scenes. (I'm thinking specifically of the mithril mine and the agreement of the ghost king, both of which killed any surprise factor later.) Films have a rhythm to them, and shoving every bit of stuff back in spoils it.
@@Serai3 I agree that the extended cut can't be regarded as objectively better, because of some of the points you mentioned earlier. There are many scenes that were cut because they just weren't necessary (still boggles my mind however, why the saruman scene in rotk was cut). But i would have to say that for someone who enjoys the movies the first time around (probably the theatrical cut), for any rewatch i would highly recommend the extended versions. A lot of the extra scenes are great or interesting at least, and i can only think of very few scenes that are really kind of bad. As a fan of the franchise and world you get so much more out of them, to the point where now, after being used to the extended cut, it would feel weird and empty to watch the theatrical cut.
@@headphonic8 i know this was writen 3 years ago, but that is exactly lore wise what is happening. The elves are going back to their realm (basically heaven) never to return to middle earth. Frodo is invited by them to go to heaven.
"Please man the fuck up." I understand. You idealize manhood as maintenance to a stoic disposition which men must use like a shield against emotional awareness, as an anchor to which a man must desperately cling, lest his soul be stirred by contemplations on his own temporal nature and ultimate mortality. You pathetic fool.
Problem is I never wanted it to end. The ending could be infinitely long and it would still be too short for me. What do people mean by the ending though? If the ending starts after Gandalf picks up Frodo with the eagles, then the ending is only 20 minutes long. A 20 minute ending to a 12 hour epic adventure I think is completely reasonable. The entire story was wrapped in about 2% of the run time. They nailed it.
Elijah Wood never wanted it to end, either. He said after ROTK was released that he could have gone on playing Frodo for years, he loved the experience that much.
In my opinion it's too rushed because of the jumps from here to there. We have three movies that run each 3 hours (theatrical cuts) which I prefer because of the pacing, and then after the climax comes one rushed end after another. It just jumps from frodo waking up in bed to Aragorn being crowned to the hobbits coming back home and having a drink to Frodo and Bilbo leaving the shire to Sam with his wife and kids. It should've taken at least 45 minutes to end in my opinion. They should've shown the hobbits packing their stuff, saying goodbye to the fellowship, having a talk about returning home and how they can't wait for their hobbit holes, parties and so on. Then when they arrive show a little bit of their life in the shire after all that and so on and on without obvious "fades to black". The endings feel too rushed. I love that movie with all my heart, but I don't understand why the ending is paced so poorly. The critics criticised it for being too long. I would criticise it for being too short :S
i've recently watched (for the hundredh time) the trilogy in long version, but this time in a theater his more than 3000 peoples and an entire orchestra playing in real time the films's musics. it taked an entire night, ended at 9 am, and nobody was sleeping, doing something else or not paying attention on this ending. this is so powerfull, and seeing those 3 films in one take make you feel like your entire life is about destroying the ring, you feel like frodo,this end is the perfect ending they could have done. i'm so glad those films exist.
5 ปีที่แล้ว +6
i always wanted to be in that place, but here in Chile is impossible to have the lotr orchestra and the closest it will be this year is in Brazil :(
Even when I was a kid, I never thought the ending was too long. It was so satisfying and soothing. It was almost cathartic, honestly, all that glowy white and slowmo after all the grime and violence. It made me feel like everything could always be okay again no matter what happened.
As a Tolkien fan I have the opposite reaction. "Don't end yet!" I'd say to myself. The movies are a true work of love for the books. Masterpieces of cinema and a gift to the world.
Ragitsu nah, it's not bigotry. As both a Canadian and a linguist, I can tell you that "about" actually *is* pronounced differently in Canada, just not to the ridiculous degree some people think. It's part of the Canadian accent, and if you're curious about it, you can look it up under the name "Canadian Raising". Hope you found that interesting!
I want to kick my past self for being frustrated at the ending of this movie when I saw it in the theater. It took me years to finally appreciate its true significance.
. and having saw the girl's profile picture, you try to create an opportunity to bash the lonely sad man bashing her in her defense like her white knight in hope that she contacts you to hang out, but only to find out that's how you'll get in her cyberfriendzone. Do you understand?.. I can't believe I'm enjoying this to 😂
A lot of people don't the scene in Rivendel because it didn't spell out what was going on. For those who still don't understand it, *Frodo thinks he's dead and is sort of okay with it.* *The last thing Frodo remembers is being on that rock in Mordor waiting for the end, then golden fucking eagles carry him off the angelic elven city and then he wakes up next the Wizard he definitely saw die in the only place Frodo knows of, that remotely resembles heaven.* He's both relieved and saddened to see his old friend again, but then one by one the others show up. *To them it's obvious they won and everyone survived so no one brings it up, but to Frodo, he thinks he and friends paid the ultimate price for freedom and what breaks his heart is the idea he got Sam killed to.* it's only when Elron walks in that the matter is cleared up and Frodo realises the truth and farce is over. I think Elijah Wood did a great job conveying this, but it would seem I am in the minority.
There is no indication that Frodo ever got over the wound the Ring gave him. (It's much too facile to call it PTSD.) The very reason he left is because he _couldn't_ get over it, and no one ever knew what happened to him after he left.
@@Serai3 (He got all better when he went to magic elf land.) The ringscar is an unsubtle fantasy take on PTSD; and if you think PTSD is facile, then perhaps you should volunteer to assist some veterans in need.
@@bronsonmcleod1449 Nope, sorry. Nowhere in the story, either in the books or the movie, does it say he got better. That's because there was nobody who ever came back. You can tell yourself he did, but Tolkien never said he got better, only that he HOPED to get better. Tolkien's story had little to do with happy endings, as he thought they were an immature way to end a story.
@@bronsonmcleod1449 And I NEVER said PTSD was facile. If you'll read my comment again, you'll see I said that CALLING WHAT HAPPENED TO FRODO that was facile. Tolkien himself said it was not the same thing as shell shock (the original name for the condition), but much deeper and impossible to heal anywhere in Middle Earth. That is exactly WHY he had to leave. He didn't WANT to leave - he HAD to leave. LOTR is not a modern story, and it was never intended to be an allegory of any kind, including the idea that Frodo's wound was anything that anyone could experience again. What happened to him was unique, which is why no cure existed or would ever exist in Middle Earth.
@@Serai3 'As for Frodo or other mortals, they could only dwell in Aman for a limited time -- whether brief or long. The Valar had neither the power nor the right to confer 'immortality' upon them. Their sojourn was a 'purgatory', but one of peace and healing and they would eventually pass away (die at their own desire and of free will) to destinations of which the Elves knew nothing.' -Letter 246 He [Tolkien] was referring to the parts of Arda marred by Morgoth, not Middle Earth as a physical entity; the former does not include Valinor/Aman. That being said, Tolkien is hardly omniscient: there's more parallel in what he wrote than he ever admitted. Or would you also say there's no parallel between LotR's "Noman-Lands" and WWI's infamous "No Man's Land", merely because Tolkien refused to admit the influence the World Wars had on his writing?
Théoden's speech. "A red day. A sword day. And the sun rises" When they start to yell "death" and it cuts to merry and éowyn shouting it too... UGH IT GETS ME
I've never felt like Return of the King was too long, for precisely this reason. LOTR is an emotionally absorbing story that needed a long denouemont; when you're as invested in these characters like I was, you feel mounting frustration for every unanswered question and every unaccounted fate. This was actually the thing that I hated the most about an ending to another epic trilogy, but to speak it's name would be to summon it's awful presence.
I can definitely see it being _The Matrix_ films he was talking about. I enjoyed all three, but they really got lost somewhere along the way. _Reloaded_ was pretty good, and could be mostly salvaged as is with a few minor tweaks, but _Revolutions_ missed too many little things, and many big things, that it is just bad. My understanding is that the Wachowskis intent was to do _one_ sequel and one prequel, that may have been better. I have not seem them, but there are fan edits that combine _Reloaded_ and _Revolutions_ into a single film and I have heard that most are infinitely better. As to the prequel, a feature length version of _The Second Renaissance_ showing the creation of the machines, their subjugation, attempts at peace, the war, and human subjugation more fully with human and machine characters that we would follow over the course would be interesting. The two problem that the studio, as I understand it, had with the prequel is that it would A) not feature the bankable heros of the last film and B) give more sympathy to the machines. Something that the studio feared would drive away viewers.
I hope more versions of this story will be filmed someday. It's much too classic to have only one iteration. I want to see different filmmakers take it on and see what they come up with.
@@ogbee9690 You have no basis whatsoever for saying that, given that none of them actually exist yet. If you like this one, fine, but saying nothing else could ever be as good is just declaring that you have no intention of giving any other version a chance. That's like saying no other version of Hamlet could possibly be as good as the original staging in the 16th century - it's nonsense.
@@Serai3 fine, it’s EXTREMELY unlikely any other version will turn out as great as PJ’s. Happy now? Seriously, I don’t know what you expect. the cast and crews camaraderie, they were all extremely likable and kind to one another, the amount of passion involved, HOWARD SHORES SCORE, the beautiful breathtaking landscapes, the attention to detail, the amount of emotion. Idk how you expect that to be topped.
I think the "end already" idea comes from how it transitions from scene to scene. If I recall correctly (and its been a while since I last watched it) the scenes regularly end with a fade out. I definitely remember - when first watching it in the cinema - that as the camera faded out on Mount Doom, I thought "oh shit, is that where its going to end? Too fast man!" but then it didn't end, fortunately. Without knowing at what point it would end, the scenes kept ending as if they were about to cut to credits. When you don't know what the final scene is, then that affects the way you perceive the flow. You get the "exhale moment," as you prepare for credits and then it keeps going. Then it does it again. You bob up and down emotionally as you keep expecting it to end and it doesn't. Now once you know the final scene and are watching it for a subsequent viewing, all that is gone, because you now know when the end is coming. At this point, you can see the narrative more clearly and the ending makes perfect sense. But on first viewing, its almost like a bait and switch as you continually fail to successfully predict that final fade to black.
I ALWAYS thought this! That fade out edit was the reason everyone thought it was too long: because they were tricked into thinking multiple times that it was going to fade to credits! If that transition wasn't there, I honestly don't think people would have complained as much.
The idea that it takes too long started when ROTK was released to theaters. It was four hours long and none of the theater owners wanted to schedule an intermission. When you're sitting there full of Pepsi, the movie does indeed never seem to end! (That's true, by the way. I remember being careful not to drink anything because I knew I'd be miserable in a couple of hours.)
It's truly amazing that people still go back to the Lord of the Rings movies and always have something new to say. In a time where things Marvel movies or Star Wars anthology movies seem to be the rage none of them hold a candle to the masterpiece trilogy.
Absolutely. For all that's it's a fantasy set in a fantasy version of our world, it deals with the issues of war and violence and sacrifice and heartache in a FAR more adult way than any of the superhero junk you see nowadays. That's why so many people think Frodo is "weak" or "boring" - because real emotion and the real fallout from such horrors have no interest for them. They want to see unrealistic Hollywood versions of life, not honest portrayals of what war leads to.
I heard it said that the movie has three endings, each important: The Ring's end The Fellowship's end (reunited) The hobbits' end (especially Frodo and Sam)
The Ring's end The Fellowship reunites Aragorn is crowned The hobbits reach the Shire The hobbits have a drink in the bar Sam gets married Any of these could have been the ending.
the only reason people say it was too long, myself included, is less about actual length and more about how the fade outs were messing with the people in the theater who thought they could get up to pee without missing anything lol.
I was so tickled when I learned how Tolkien wrote LOTR, because I've never heard of any other writer doing it this way: he started writing, got stuck, and instead of working out the problem and changing things, he started all over again. And he did that _every time he got stuck._ He would go back and rewrite from the beginning. So there are early versions of LOTR involving all kinds of plot points and characters that never made it to the finished product, there in their own little nests of story. :)
@@heathenpride7931 Now, now. Let's not be hard on ol' George. The problem isn't his; the problem is his fans' infantile inability to be satisfied with the ending of a story.
I loved the ending. We just spent NINE hours with these characters struggling and despairing. I like that we're given an emotional, contemplative, almost therapeutic ending to coax us out of all the gloom and war we just traversed through.
Kyle Williamson Totally dude! You miss so many essential and moving scenes if you don’t watch the extended edition! My gosh these movies are soooooo good!
I agree that frodo not being happy when the ring is destroyed is about him feeling conflicted. It is true he is confused to some degree. It is probably true that he feels the pull of the ring still - and some regret that he could ultimately not defeat it on his own but only carry it. But most of all I feel like he knows and has known for a while that while he might succeed in destroying the ring - he might not be able to come back. What he used to be - young frodo, the shire all of that is long gone. That dying of his old self began as far back as when he was stabbed with the morgul blade. He has spent himself as a charge, knowing he would not come back but still fighting the ring with superhuman determination. That was what held him up,. Now it's over. But he finds himself in the same place. His outer goal achieved but his inner journey at a dead end. It is not a question of getting some rest and gaining perspective. He has to become something different or wither away in the remaining darkness. The jubilation as he wakes up fades into reality yes, but also into the tenderness of shared experience he has with Sam. Sam is the only true witness to Frodos ordeal . While Gandalf may better understand it's true reach and deeper significance - sam was there maintaining frodos core humanity through persistent love and friendship. Sam is at the root of where frodo is coming from and who he used to be and to whatever is left of that. Gandalf is at the root of where he will be going and what he will become. But he does not fully realise this yet. As they receive the praise of Aragorn and the crowd I am not sure they feel like they do not deserve it. I think they feel the loneliness of knowing that this was never why they did it, and that these people will never know what it was they truly did. THeir experience is a deep and lonely and personal one that few can appreciate. And no amount of external recognition will change that. Once again - especially Frodos isolation is underscored. Which leads me to my next point. Frodo, like Gandalf has shed not only his ego but sacrificed all he used to be for the greater good, but also urged on by inner wounds and the threat of a spreading inner darkness. He is on the verge of becoming what some scriptwriters refer to as a crown chakra character (I am not into the chakra thing - but it's descriptive). Someone who has shed both his mortality and mortal identity. Other characters like that are Gandalf the white, who while still being Gandalf in some sense has become something slightly more impersonal and removed from the affairs and cares of mortal men (Dr Manhattan is another example of such a character). You still perceive some of their human identity but they are on their way somewhere else. Frodo as he boards the final ship smiles and we see, finally, as he passes on a throwback to youthful frodo with no cares. The human part that loves his friends. The part that the ring very nearly completely destroyed. The part that can never be fully reconciled with the traumas he has experienced in this world and he is forced to move on. Sam cannot share this experience. He is at another level. Only in the undying lands can frodo retain some memory and semblance of what he once was while becoming something more which can contain the experience of darkness only by becoming something more fluid and layered and complex. But also - to the human heart - something slightly more dissociated and aloof. so theres a late nigh novel forya
Having seen these films so many times now, I've never caught the fact that Frodo did not truly smile again until the very end or the significance of it.
I don't think Frodo's smile is indicative of any healing. I think he smiled because he knew his friends would never see him again, and he didn't want them to remember him weak and in pain - he wanted them to remember him looking with love on those he loved most. It's what you do for someone you love, after all.
True. Frodo's is the most in-your-face, but most characters certainly had arcs. My personal favorite is Sam's combo non-arc of absolute loyalty and arc of self-confidence. M&P's arcs of growing up and being responsible, Aragorn's arc of choosing a path & letting others choose theirs, L&G's arcs of racism, the list goes on for almost all characters.
UltimateKyuubiFox Not at all: it’s a split between Aragorn and his inheritance, Frodo and Sam, Sauron himself and Saruman. Additionally, if you’ve read the books, the entire mythos is Morgoth’s/Melkor’s story with Lord of The Rings being his lasting impact before he returns.
@@isaaccarranza1461 The story is about overcoming evil by working together, trusting each other and sacrificing yourself. That doesn't work at all if you focus too much on Frodo. Everything which is done by members of the fellowship of the ring is very relevant for the story. Frodo's role is kind of special because he deals the final blow, but that would not have been possible without the trust of the others. Most of them were willing to sacrifice themselves in the battle at the Black Gate for his success and Sam was willing to share frodo's fate. In addition, Frodo's victory would have been irrelevant if the orcs had already overran all the free peoples of Middle Earth, which was also prevented by his fellows.
+Sage Rants While I am bumbed out that you don't like my favorite actor (Leo DiCaprio) and that you were not a fan of The Revenant (a movie I now see as the best movie ever made) I still love your videos and I think you are one of the best youtubers around! Keep up the good work!
@@sinisterkrex6465 I feel like they are on a similar scale but they play with fantasy in such a different way that it does nobody justice to compare them 1v1.
You are spot on. The ending is not long, it's just perfect. Frodo's depression after the ring is destroyed is incredibly emotional and powerful. I almost wish it was longer. Or have it's own mini movie prequel.
Just rewatched the trilogy and this essay came to mind at the ending. I appreciate the point you're trying to make, but Frodo actually does smile a few times before the very end: when they arrive home, when Sam makes his move with Rosie, and at Sam and Rosie's wedding. I get the point you're trying to make, but it's up to interpretation, of course, because he does show happiness before his story ends.
I think Nostalgia Critic summarized it best in that the problem with these five endings was the editing/fakeouts: the blacks outs and the zoom outs all make it seem as though it is about to end so many times that it brings you out of the story. Still needed, just needed to be edited a bit better?
Agreed but the editing wasn't too great in a lot of parts (i.e. Denethor's hallucination of Boromir) but at the same time I think I get it. The fade to black was almost a deep breath as well as a passage of time. As the source material was used, it could also be the cheapest way to film the end while being understood by the audience.
that sums it up for me too. I hope that it was the editing that annoyed audiences rather than what was happening. because it kept doing things that made it look like it was about to end such as fading to black or zooming out or having the music slowly fade to silence
Time to be nitpicky: I'd argue that Frodo's choice to abandon Charadras and move through Moria is story driving =p We see him act as a common hobbit for one of the last times, choosing comfort over hardship, even knowing that said hardship was a better choice. As a result of his allowing the longing for comfort to overcome the good sense that was following Gandalf's advice, Frodo ends up seeing a friend die and going through a much harder experience than he had signed up for. Later on we never again see Frodo letting the common hobbit love for comfort before all things control his decisions, he doesn't stall before leaving the Fellowship alone and even initially rejects the idea of a helper. Frodo grew at the loss of Gandalf in a manner he would have not if they had crossed the mountains as intended.
The entire Moria fuck up with goblins and the Balrog was an accident. While it was risky to cross it, it was totally possible to do so without being noticed, and still better than falling from a mountainside. Gandalf knew it, and Frodo was aware that Charadras was a no-go.
I don't think Moria for Caradras was 'the comfortable way out'. Gandalf was afraid Saruman had already calculated his every move. By leaving the decision up to Frodo, Gandalf neutralized the advantage Saruman had from knowing his mind.
The musical piece for Frodo's leaving is so amazing and perfect for what the tone of the scene represents It's the perfect mix of happiness and depression all at once
I remember when watching the film the audience began to get a little restless after the 3rd fade out or so, but I think if you know there's more to come or at least rewatch the film, you see the utter brilliance of all the endings. I'm glad to hear more people like it and cry buckets. No matter how many times I've rewatched ROTK, once Sam says he can't carry the ring but he can carry Frodo, the tears begin and basically don't stop! From them laying on the rock in each other's arms, the reunion, the bowing, Frodo leaving and turning around and smiling, Sam with his beautiful family... just TEARS!
-_- waitingDAY Yeah it makes sense, that's how it has to be. I was very young when I first saw the movies and read the books, and it didn't dawn on me until much later that Gollum was close to breaking free of the ring, because Frodo believed in him.
Sam Wise the brave is who made Gollum remain as he was. When he woke up and accused Gollum of sneaking. When in fact he was having second thoughts about taking Sam and Frodo through Cirith Ungol. He actually strokes Frodo while hes sleeping.. As Gandalf said..'' Smeagols life was a sad story.''
I saw it in the theater and yeah, everyone got a laugh out of it. This is just the instant reaction when people aren't putting a lot of thought into it, noticing Frodo's reaction, etc.
It is funny but it’s not funny in a “HAHA DUMB OLD IDIOT” way, but just amusing because Frodo went through so much. It was funny to see someone who didn’t really know what he went through ask him about it, and watch him lie since there was no way he could quickly explain all the trauma he just went through.
I feel that Frodo's jubilation didn't fade because he was brought back to reality. I feel like, seeing Sam, good Ol' Sam, was just such a pure moment. They made it together. They survived. Together. That's a special kind of brotherhood.
The most tear jerking moment for me is actually in The Two Towers, when king Theoden weeps at his son's grave and says: "No parent should have to bury his own child" :-( The endings are more heartwarming for me :)
I’ve always thought the ROTK had the best movie ending to a franchise. It gives you time to see the characters. Ease yourself down from the ring being destroyed. Other franchises would’ve had them destroy the ring, have their meeting in the bed at Rivendell, and rolled the credits.
Not just the ending but the ending credits are brilliant as well. The combination of the song Into the West and the portraits of all the characters makes me teary every time.
Yes. I usually cry right through "into the west", and when the song is over I get up to turn the TV off, thinking I'm done with crying... And then the shire theme plays again. Instantly in tears, can't help it.
THANK YOU for making this! I remember sitting in the theatre watching this completely rapt, willing it to never end hahaha. I always thought I was biased because my favorite parts of stories are the beginnings and the ends and I am always sad when the endings are cut too short. But I am happy to see that not EVERYONE hates the long ending! It's a trilogy, you can't just cut it off!
RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK is another good example of a movie where the climaxes of both the plot and the story happen at the same time. The plot is about Indiana Jones in a race to find the Ark of the Covenant before the Nazis. The story as it's presented is a continuous game of oneupsmanship between Indy and Belloq, his rival and as (Belloq himself puts it) his "shadowy reflection". From the opening and throughout the movie Indy gains an artifact, and Belloq through shadier methods steals it away. It's a constant back and forth between them and even Marion gets caught in it with Belloq tries to take her from him. The plot climaxes with the Ark finally being opened and unleashing the wrath of God on the Nazis. Simultaneously the story climax is Indy survives because he closes his eyes and doesn't look at it, while Belloq does and is destroyed. Also while the plots of both RAIDERS and INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE are similar(Indy races against the Nazis to find a powerful religious artifact), the story is different. LAST CRUSADE is about Indiana Jones repairing relationship with his estranged father. The climax of the plot is when the antagonist, Donavan drinks from the false grail and is destroyed. The climax of the story is Indy's dad finally calling Indy by his chosen name and not "Junior" and telling him to let the Holy Grail(the thing Henry Sr has been searching for his whole life) to let it go and drop into a chasm.
I think the story climax of Raiders is deeper than that. It's about faith. Indy didn't believe in the powers of the Ark, he was motivated by personal reasons (Prof. Ravenwood) but that all changed when he finally had an "arc" of his own when he told Marion to close her eyes as the Ark was opened.
4:53 that freakin' score. It's been years since I've seen the movies and I think that score pays off so much after seeing all the films. It's sad, memorable, freeing, and sweet,
Most people have no idea how incredibly important soundtracks are. Music literally tells you _what_ to feel during a film. Years ago, I got to see a screening of a movie that didn't have a soundtrack yet, and weirdly enough, I had no idea what kind of movie it was supposed to be. Was that supposed to be funny? Was that a joke? Is this a comedy or not? It wasn't until I saw the film on release that I realized _nothing_ about it was supposed to be funny, and it was the music that told me that. If you ever have the chance to do that, jump at it. It's an incredible lesson in filmmaking!
"The jubilation... fades". And yet when Frodo sees Sam, he feels an even deeper kind of joy: that of remembering the true friendship he has established with Sam after all they've been through together.
I never cried when the ring was destroyed. I always start crying when Sam enters the room, and start weeping like a bitch when Frodo says he's leaving, too.
I use, 'Do you think the LOTR's ending was too long?' as a test of a true fan. If they say no they passed, if they say yes- get out of here! Why wouldn't you want a proper ending to this trilogy you've supposedly been invested in for 9+ hours? The only 'unnecessary' ending was Sam back with his family, but that one was pure book honour, ending it the same as the book.
Well StarWars wrapped a 3 movie trilogy with about 2 minutes of Ewok partying. To paraphrase one of my other posts if I were writing the screenplay myself I'd have cut the eagle-rescue to a few brief shots with just a second of black in-between, I'd keep the scene where Frodo wakes up and the one where Aragorn gets crowned then the final return to the shire would just be a quick montage of shots linked and explained by a voiceover from Frodo then ending with a distance-shot of all the hobbits coming out of their homes to see the 4 returning characters. maybe also the final shot could be Sam & Rose's wedding with the camera panning upwards.
Personally, Star wars and LOTR aren't comparable for me, one is based on an incredibly dense and detailed book and the other is more an action flick in space. Having a montage for a trilogy where every other important moment was fully fleshed out and developed would have been inadequate and not emotionally fulfilling.
Maybe. Personally I got my fulfilment from Frodo waking up back in Minas Tirith with the other fellowship characters and Aragorn kissing Arwen. Everything else which happened after that just felt like winding down the story.
I love the multiple endings of ROTK, and I only ever watch the extended editions, I haven't bothered with the cinematic versions since first seeing them.
I will respectfully disagree with you on leaving out "the Scouring of The Shire" That chapter was the summation of what Tolkein wrote about; that everything changes after war..even the Shire. Frodo came home to what he believed was something untouched...it was not. If Peter Jackson left it in, it would have given Frodo's smile (of which I agree that's the actual journeys' end) a deeper and fully understood meaning. but that's my .02$
Another thing that chapter does is move the people of the Shire into engagement with the broader world. The hobbits of the fellowship return and model the virtues of adventurous, engaged life by being the tips of the spears that drive out Saruman, and they also enable the other hobbits to find out the true quality of their collective and individual characters. And once Saruman is defeated, the Shire actually becomes a better place. It is important that the heroes return to share the benefits of their victory with the community. Jackson's decision to leave out the Scouring of the Shire betrayed that important step a little. But, of course, unsung heroes are noble too, and that is what Jackson gives us in his adaption.
I think it has a greater effect in the books than it would have in the movies since as book readers we have already seen Bilbo come back to an untouched Shire from his adventure
I wasn't really a fan of it in the book. It's true that it shows that war reaches every corner, but I also felt it distracted from the personal growth of the four Hobbits. In the movies, they come home to a Shire that's unchanged, but that allows you to see the effects of the saga on these characters. It's like a war vet coming home to a country that's the same as when they left, but they've changed so much inside that they never see life the same way. You also see more clearly how much the ring wounded Frodo and Sam. The Shire is as peaceful and beautiful as ever, but it does nothing for the unrest in Frodo's heart. It's harder to show that when Frodo's back to running around wielding a sword.
My first reaction when I read that portion of the book was utter disbelief. I had spent the entire time in the belief that the Shire would remain untouched. Then all of a sudden, it's Saruman's industrial fiefdom. It cut my legs out from under me. Looking back, it was an incredibly truthful ending to a story written by a man who lived the terror of the Somme. Nothing is unscathed by war.
Dear sir, thankyou for this video. It has assuaged the aggravation I have had stir in me for 14 years, every time I have heard someone complain about LOTR, and use that irksome phrase of it "having too many endings". Because I adore the ending! I remember the moment of being in the cinemas, after the ring is destroyed, and Frodo and Sam coming out to sit on that rock, and Frodo declaring it was done, then embracing Sam and the screen fading to black; I remember so clearly in that moment my body tensing up and my inner voice screaming "Don't let that be the end! Don't let that be the end! Pllllleeeaase, let that not be the end!", because it would have been so unsatisfying to me. It would've ruined the movies for me, somewhat. I cared about the characters. The ring was just a device to push the characters along in all they did. I didn't watch it for the ring to be destroyed. I watched it for the characters. I personally find the ending perfect. I left the cinema satisfied (and crying like a baby). And now that I've seen The Hobbit, the ending is even more perfect, because it gave a resolution to Bilbo's character as well! Anyway, I've rambled enough. It was just such a delight to watch a video on the subject, and hear someone else say everything what I feel about it - but more succinctly, haha.
I love the ending of Return of the King! I think it's probably the best ending ever because it gives an epic story a satisfactory conclusion. I usually feel endings are underwhelming and wish more were as long as this one.
When I first saw the movie in theaters, it was a weird ending, I was waiting for Frodo to smile. It took a lot of time for him to actually do it and it left something in me. I connected with him in a way. I thought, at that period of my life, that I was more like Sam. But I felt sympathy for Frodo when he described a faraway land that he could never really go back to. Things would never be normal again for him and that affected me.
The scouring of the Shire was actually my favorite part of the whole series, though. They cut it for the same reason they cut old Tom Bombadil out. Run time. It has no impact on the rest of the plot, so cutting it for the sake of run time is an easy decision.
Not to mention the time to develop more characters. The scouring of the shire would have been far too weak without at least some of the main actors other than Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin, but then you need time to introduce them. Same reason that, in The Two Towers, the elves came to reinforce King Theoden's men at Helms Deep while Eomer and his men were in exile, only to brought in as the (literal) cavalry to save the day by Gandalf - following the book and having Eomer at Helm's Deep instead of the elves would have meant they'd need to spend extra time to introduce Erkenbrand so his timely arrival wouldn't be a _deus ex machina._
@@hyperion3145 I don't think you picked up my point. The hobbits _en masse_ are introduced, and the main four (Frodo, Sam, Merry, and Pippin) developed well before where the Scouring of the Shire would have come in the films had they included it. But Tom Cotton (Rosie's father) plays a major part in the Scouring, and Lobelia Sackville-Baggins' character development is also a big part (in impact if not in total words). Without them, especially Lobelia, I think the story of it would have been far too weakened to be worth including.
Cutting out the Scouring actually makes the ending more poignant, as the hobbits go back to being just ordinary hobbits, rather than heroes who saved the Shire. That scene in the bar where they all look at each other, knowing that nobody in the Shire knows what happened - it kills me every time.
Thank you sir! That smile from Frodo is literally my favorite moment in the whole trilogy (except maybe the Ride of the Rohirrim) but I've never quite understood fully why it's such an incredibly and tear jerking moment. Thank you for such a concise and clear explanation!
"You bow to no one..." - Literally a shock through the body, hairs rising and my eyes feeling wet. Less than a fucking second. I should really rewatch this. It's been years. I almost feel ashamed.
@theanonymous memester I have to agree. As much as i love the books and want the films to be as close to them as possible, you have to recognize the difference between the two types of media. In a movie you have much less time and have to pay much closer attention to the development of rising and falling tension. After the big bang that is the destruction of the ring, adding in another conflict in the end, seemingly out of nowhere (the films wouldn't have time to set it up anyway) might work in a book, but in a movie would be just completely out of place. It is unfortunate that in deleting this scene, the message of war having terrible repercussions right to your doorstep, even in the most innocent of places regardless of if you win or lose, is somewhat lost, although i think they did quite well, showing that in the second movie with rohan being raided, aswell as frodo and sam being changed as a person so much upon their return.
@@kreia187 You raise excellent points regarding the Scouring of the Shire's worth in the books. Please permit me to add one more. It related to themes of isolationism that are prevalent throughout LotR. Which is mentioned as early as the chapter "Three is Company" from Fellowship. The elf that Frodo meets says directly that The Shire is part of the greater world, whether they like it or not, and they can't fence it out forever. The Shire was never as pure as it's often depicted. Every town of hobbits considers every other town of hobbits to be a bunch of weirdos, and that only their own town has respectable hobbits. An isolated region was slowly breaking down into smaller, more isolated communities. Which is exactly what Saruman preyed on. Saruman, ultimately, was defeated by four hobbits that did not stay in their own lane. Who were worldly and experienced, and did not readily discount the ways of others. The Shire was not returned to what it was before, but filled with new plantlife from the gift Sam brought home. And honestly, I think that's kind of beautiful.
Damn, this is actually really, really, interesting. One thing, though - personally, I'd call the two sections 'plot' and 'character' lines. 'Story', for me, is the entire thing overall, all aspects included.
I just finished watching it again and I was trying to explain to my son why I thought that the long ending was necessary. You have articulated my thoughts perfectly. Plot vs story. Thanks.
What? There are people who think TLOFR ending is too long? I have never heard anyone say that, seriously. I think people who would say that are people who wouldn't bother watching the entire trilogy to begin with.
The only "too long" I EVER heard in relation to the movies was after The Fellowship of The Ring, when I overheard a guy at the theater say he was running out the next day to buy the books because two years was too long to wait to find out how it ended.
The most common criticism regarding the ending is that when adaptin a book to a movie, you should make some changes, and the ending shouldn't drag on like that after the final battle is over. While I understand where this is coming from, these people should try to understand that every single moment from that ending is important to conclude all the things that were still open after the destruction of The Ring. If they had ended immediately, it would've been like The Hobbit trilogy where almost nothing has a conclusion after the battle is over.
Rivershield Imagine if PJ had included the scouring of the shire in the trilogy, audience had walked out from the theater in the middle of the movie!! XDDD
My main issue with the ending was the black screens between the different sections--so it looks, sounds, and feels like the transition between the last scene and rolling the credits. Remember, this movie is well over 3 hours, so pretending the movie is over and then it ISN'T over for another 15 minutes is seriously just taunting your bladder when you see it in the theatre. And THEN you keep getting sucker-punched with the feels, so you leave the theatre rushing for the nearest restroom and trying to look like you weren't bawling during an action/adventure movie.
I never found watching that ending to be frustrating. I actually don't know if my dad came up with this himself or read it somewhere, but when he introduced me to LOTR when I was a kid, he explained that all those black screens are points at which you, the viewer, can choose your own ending. I think the reason, as you put it, it feels like it's "pretending the movie is over", is because all the black screens could very well be where the film ends and it wouldn't be that huge of a deal. But, as JustWrite put it, the actual story ends with Frodo getting on the ship.
I think the black screens were amazing. Especially right before the eagles appeared to recover Sam and Frodo. THAT black screen was absolutely brilliant. It wouldn't be the same without it.
Fantastic analysis. There is one quibble/disagreement I have, though maybe we agree a little bit after all on this. At 3:22, I never thought the celebration was undercut by Sam entering the room. For Frodo, it's different. He's not frowning, his smile doesn't disappear, it just changes. One of the major story trends of the series was Frodo's and Sam's platonic love. It's only deepened by their mutual survival on Orodruin. So while Frodo enjoys the antics of Merry and Pippin, and is happy to see Gandalf again, the appearance of Sam is a little more special for him. I don't think it's a sorrow/sadness there, at least, rewatching this scene with that thought in mind, I'm not reminded of the discomfort they feel at the other celebrations.
Wow... a fantastic analysis. I knew in my heart of that but it was satisfying to be given the ammunition to debate someone (logically and intelligently) about WHY the Return of the King's ending is NOT too long! Thank you thank you thank you! Also, that is great advice to future book, story, and script writers!
Similarly, I don't understand why people hate on Fury Road for having "no story". There is more character development there than in all four Transformers combined! Yes that doesn't say much, but every character in Mad Max was a well made character with actual motivation and story that drive the plot.
I didn't like it. I don't think an egalitarian society is automatically more virtuous than a warlike survivalist tribe in a post-apocalyptic reality. so I don't really get why we're supposed to root for the 'good guys' in mad max
Most emotional scenes in LOTR: I cant carry it for you, but i can carry you. You bow to no one. Sams speech at the end og the two towers. Ride of the rohirim. Every scene in the trilogy!
It's funny how much I agree with the overall point-that the story is continuing after the plot has concluded-while I disagree with so many individual points you make. Then again, that's the thing about subtext-it's rich, but people can read many different things in it. My read of it is quite different while the overall idea is consistent. When Sam walks in to see Frodo in the ending, for instance, that's not the moment the ending conflict begins. That's the two characters sharing a moment of respect and understanding because they were together the whole way, and there's nothing left for them to say about it. Frodo's emotions don't fall as Sam enters-there's some weird editing there to make it seem like the expressions are restrained, but there's a very much a knowing smile shared between the two characters. Now let's go to the bowing scene. There is a message there in the expressions but it's slightly different than you said. Merry and Pippin are smiling nervously, a bit awkward and sheepish, because almost anyone would be. I don't think they feel it's deserved any more than Frodo, but what Frodo is realizing is that he can't take any joy in it. He doesn't feel connected to what's happening and what everyone is celebrating-the destruction of the ring-is, for him, a moment of great pain. And that's the moment when Frodo recognizes he is disconnected from the world, which is the through line of his ending. Again, it's similar, in that you're recognizing subtextual things are happening, but I think you're reading them wrong. I don't see Frodo necessarily conflicted during Sam's wedding. You're not seeing memories of Mount Doom specifically there. What we DO see is that any mirth or joy Frodo ultimately does find is fleeting. He's truly happy for Sam, but Frodo gave everything he had just getting the ring to Mount Doom and he's a spent man. Sam's life is continuing but Frodo knows that his is not. And I'd argue the story doesn't end with Frodo smiling at Sam, the climax of the story is Frodo handing the book to Sam and saying, "The last pages are for you." The final line in Tolkien's classic is Sam saying, "Well, I'm back." Because while this story isn't a strict WWII allegory, it is still a war allegory, heavily influenced by Tolkien's own experiences in the first World War. Frodo is the soldier who survived but could never go home, suffering from PTSD and depression which are destroying the life he should have had. He sacrificed everything so that other people, Sam in particular, had a home to return to. Frodo is smiling not because he's defeated the ring, but because he's left the book, and symbolically the world, for Sam.
The ending was absolutely perfect in my opinion. Your analysis only made me appreciate it more. It pulls at the heartstrings because you saw these characters interact with one another and grow for so long, and now, although the story of their lives continue, their story of the Ring closes. You see them struggle and fight throughout the entire series, so that at the end when you see them find peace again, one after the other, and Frodo too in the end, it just brings closure- like they truly deserve it. Frodo went through so much turmoil, and he was worrying throughout the entire series that he would never find that peace again. So like you said, when he steps onto that boat and smiles, THAT is the climax. Because despite all odds, despite him leaving his past life behind him forever, he is at peace. It brings me to tears every time. like one of the final lines in the movie say, "and the fellowship, though forever bonded by the ties of friendship, was ended" (paraphrased). The movie just made so sure to tie up ALL loose ends in the story. I love LoTR so much.
I watched the lord of the rings when i was very young. i hadnt the emotions which i have today, and i wasnt beable to think like im thinking today... watching the lord of the rings over and over gives me goosebumbs everytime, because now i think different and can emagine the pain and happyness, they have and the fears they had to get over. Nowadays i feel the same like frodo and sam. or even like boromir (I still dont like him). I know what it means to leave something behind or lose friends, even if i didnt really knew them or i just met. The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit is like an world i really want to be in and dont want to be. A World full of Beauty, Friendship and trust and full of Sadness, hate and fears. But when i think about the emotions the charakters have at the moment and what they could think in moments of peace or war is calming to me. because now i know, it is normal to think about such things in different ways. Tolkien made a world, people can relate to. Destroying something everybodys hate but you could never do, cause you love it to much and it makes you feel good without knowing that its bad for you knows nearly everybody of us (i think). Hearing the Soundtrack is like diving deeper and deeper in the world of Lord of The rings. The Soundtrack combines all aspects of Tolkiens world. The Fears, The War, The peaceful moments, nearly everything you can find in this world, charakters and all antagonists and gives us a world we can relate to and can dream of. And the way the story is written (told) is just one big masterpiece and the peoples which are complaining about the lenght of all 3 movies dont really know how to appreciate This Story. Still my favorite movies and books And... sorry for my english ^^
Things I love more than life itself: 5) Music. (Into the West is the last song I listened to before my Dad died 5 minutes later.) 4) My cats. 3) The Return of the King. 2) The Two Towers. 1) The Fellowship of the Ring.
I believe a lot of people had the “End Already” feeling because of the way society has become. We as a society have become less about the journey and more about the destination. I personally loved the ending and loved the journey, but in today’s face paced world, where everything is go go, make money, immediate satisfaction, fast food mentality, many minds have been geared in a way that they don’t want to think deeply, they just want to be told. They don’t want to stop and smell the roses so to speak. I feel it’s a shame. We have so many modern conveniences and life has become about getting huge careers with lots of money, we have forgotten to slow down and see the beauty that money and career is suppose to bring
The ending of 'Return of the King' is never long. It arrives precisely when it means to.
Mike M A nod to Gandalf, good catch!
Bro I choked on my water XD
Agreed. 🥰
I think the ending goes on for long but it’s necessary to tie all the threads together in the end. So I don’t really mind it
true story...1 oscar for every ending
The LOTR movies are over ten hours long. It really needed a long ending. You can't wrap up a story like this in 10 minutes.
cowsaysboo Peter Jackson was an idiot who thought that Tolkien published the story as three books, when in reality it was published as three VOLUMES due to a paper shortage at the time. There were SIX books.
If Jackson had made the story as a film series rather than insisting on a Trilogy, it could have been six movies that were 2 hours long. And you could have added even more detail in the extended editions that was not material to the plot, like the songs, and other scenes which we're not essential but added much to the story, like Pippin meeting with Beregond and Bergil etc.
Wow, you really don't know anything about Peter Jackson. He's as much a fan of Tolkien as you are, probably more. And of course he knew how many books there were. He'd read them since he was a kid, doofus. Try finding things out before you act like an ass next time.
Apparently his wife is a huge fan too. nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran_Walsh www.imdb.com/name/nm0909638/?ref_=tt_ov_wr
@@simonpurist4499 How bout you try to make an adaptation this good. Huh?
And the ending in the movies is actually quite short compared to the ending in the novel.
I've watched lotr nearly 50 times (no joke) and I have never once said "END ALREADY"
but that's just because lotr is life and who wants life to end?
I feel you man! LotR is amazing.
Me
I think that feeling of "end already" is because there are some shots where it wouldn't surprise to start seeing the credits roll:
After Frodo and Sam are on the top of the mountain that the screen fades out, it fades out in a way that feels like the movie is over.
After the coronation of Aragorn, the zoom out looks like something that could be the last shot of the movie.
... and finally, there is the real ending.
50 is light numbers out here...
the crazy king that set him and faramir on fire
A lot of people think Elijah Woods is “boring”, but I think no one could have played the role of Frodo Baggins better, it seems like he truly understands his character.
The character of Frodo is just plain boring honestly, has nothing to do with Elijah.
@Gary Allen ehm no, we see the story through the eyes of sam
wdym no one thinks he’s boring
No, Peter Jackson understands his character. This is the result of fantastic directing. He knew exactly how to portray Frodo in each scene and communicated that to Elijah. That said, Elijah was a great actor for this part.
Honestly, Frodo is boring in the books, easily the least interesting of the Hobbits.
Jackson did his best to make him interesting and I believe he did q great job. Elijah Wood was great too. He captured Frodo's innocence and pure soul well and also his slow fall into irreparable depression.
But I guess some people don't like innocence, purity or weakness.
So basically:
Plot=everything that happens
Story=development of characters/emotions
@SnoopyDoo I think you can have plot without story, but you can't have story without plot, even if the plot is a mere moment like making eye contact that two characters understand.
But think about it, most sitcoms etc have plot without story, nothing changes as the show goes on and everything is cleanly wrapped up in 30 minutes and never influences them again.
So basically
The plot is the external events and conflicts
The story is the internal events, changes and conflicts that happens because of the plot
Did i get it right?
That’s what he’s saying, but no. Usually screenplays are taught and thought about in the opposite way. Story is simply the events that unfold, and plot is the emotional turns. What he means is character “want” vs “need”.
And also Story=themes and ideas.
@SnoopyDoo Of course you can
The biggest tear-jerker for me is before the Rohan cavalry charge, gets me every time.
boromirs last stand fight
Faramir sacrificing himself for Osgiliath
Rohan is lame
that music playing when gandalf goes and draws back the nazgul so the men can make it to minas tirith is an amazing moment. really the entire trilogy is comprised of epic shots and epic musical scores
olliemad But just think how many men of Gondor died during his speech.
Not sure if people give Elijah Wood enough credit for LOTR. He played the role perfectly.
It's one of those rare performances that's so good it becomes impossible to separate the actor from the role. His career actually kind of suffered because of just how good he is in this.
SaberRexZealot he deserved an Oscar for Frodo
SaberRexZealot he fell on nothing like 42 times...
Stud Burry Wafflez That has nothing to do with his portrayal of the role.
SaberRexZealot not really, he just looks sad all the time.
So glad to find people who really enjoyed the ending of ROTK. And honestly, after investing in a 9 hour epic, I expect a satisfying ending for all characters and plot points.
THIS! After efery awesome story with awesome world, i always wanted to know what happen to the character there, as i assume what possibly happen to them, because they are alive and continue to live
12 hours! :) Extended edition is the real thing.
xxSennaxx Thank you. Yes, after three movies and nine hours all the characters have to be summarized. The ending is great.
The ending in the book is even longer ;)
I started crying when Frodo had to leave his friends
There's a legend saying: everytime you mention LoTR, someone goes for a LoTR extended cut marathon.
Also, i don't need to see the scene with "you bow to no one", just brief mentioning of this and a goddamn ninja with his onions materializes
Literally on the second disc of return of the king
Ive never really understood why everyone talks about crying at the "you bow to no one" scene. its a very powerful scene, but I never found it emotional. I cry at the character moments on mount doom and at the Grey Havens.
Facts
I don't agree that the extended editions are the best. They're better in some instances, but some of the stuff in there really is kinda crappy. It's totally understandable why Jackson cut some of that stuff. Some of the added scenes actually ruin the flow, giving away info that sucks the tension and excitement out of later scenes. (I'm thinking specifically of the mithril mine and the agreement of the ghost king, both of which killed any surprise factor later.) Films have a rhythm to them, and shoving every bit of stuff back in spoils it.
@@Serai3 I agree that the extended cut can't be regarded as objectively better, because of some of the points you mentioned earlier. There are many scenes that were cut because they just weren't necessary (still boggles my mind however, why the saruman scene in rotk was cut). But i would have to say that for someone who enjoys the movies the first time around (probably the theatrical cut), for any rewatch i would highly recommend the extended versions. A lot of the extra scenes are great or interesting at least, and i can only think of very few scenes that are really kind of bad. As a fan of the franchise and world you get so much more out of them, to the point where now, after being used to the extended cut, it would feel weird and empty to watch the theatrical cut.
Frodo's departure always feels like I'm witnessing someone entering heaven and finding eternal healing.
Agree. It’s like putting my soul to a cheese grater every time. 😭
Totally feels like a metaphor for death. "Passing into the west" instead of "passing into the afterlife".
@@headphonic8 i know this was writen 3 years ago, but that is exactly lore wise what is happening. The elves are going back to their realm (basically heaven) never to return to middle earth. Frodo is invited by them to go to heaven.
I can't even watch this review without getting teary-eyed.
+RockLou wanker
Mr Pr0n
reknaw
Please man the fuck up.
RockLou ~Then ur a weirdo
"Please man the fuck up."
I understand. You idealize manhood as maintenance to a stoic disposition which men must use like a shield against emotional awareness, as an anchor to which a man must desperately cling, lest his soul be stirred by contemplations on his own temporal nature and ultimate mortality.
You pathetic fool.
Problem is I never wanted it to end. The ending could be infinitely long and it would still be too short for me. What do people mean by the ending though? If the ending starts after Gandalf picks up Frodo with the eagles, then the ending is only 20 minutes long. A 20 minute ending to a 12 hour epic adventure I think is completely reasonable. The entire story was wrapped in about 2% of the run time. They nailed it.
@Kian Dianati ah, reading Silmarillion for the first time. I envy you
agreed. it was incredible
Actually in the book the ending is half of the Return of the King. It's spectacular imo.
Elijah Wood never wanted it to end, either. He said after ROTK was released that he could have gone on playing Frodo for years, he loved the experience that much.
In my opinion it's too rushed because of the jumps from here to there. We have three movies that run each 3 hours (theatrical cuts) which I prefer because of the pacing, and then after the climax comes one rushed end after another. It just jumps from frodo waking up in bed to Aragorn being crowned to the hobbits coming back home and having a drink to Frodo and Bilbo leaving the shire to Sam with his wife and kids. It should've taken at least 45 minutes to end in my opinion. They should've shown the hobbits packing their stuff, saying goodbye to the fellowship, having a talk about returning home and how they can't wait for their hobbit holes, parties and so on. Then when they arrive show a little bit of their life in the shire after all that and so on and on without obvious "fades to black". The endings feel too rushed. I love that movie with all my heart, but I don't understand why the ending is paced so poorly. The critics criticised it for being too long. I would criticise it for being too short :S
i've recently watched (for the hundredh time) the trilogy in long version, but this time in a theater his more than 3000 peoples and an entire orchestra playing in real time the films's musics.
it taked an entire night, ended at 9 am, and nobody was sleeping, doing something else or not paying attention on this ending. this is so powerfull, and seeing those 3 films in one take make you feel like your entire life is about destroying the ring, you feel like frodo,this end is the perfect ending they could have done. i'm so glad those films exist.
i always wanted to be in that place, but here in Chile is impossible to have the lotr orchestra and the closest it will be this year is in Brazil :(
That poor orchestra- playing the whole night.
And they couldn't even see the screen
I'm envious of those who were able to see these films on a theater as back in the day, sadly I'm too young for that
I wish I could have seen it like that, but there never was a performance here in L.A. * sigh *
Even when I was a kid, I never thought the ending was too long. It was so satisfying and soothing. It was almost cathartic, honestly, all that glowy white and slowmo after all the grime and violence. It made me feel like everything could always be okay again no matter what happened.
As a Tolkien fan I have the opposite reaction. "Don't end yet!" I'd say to myself. The movies are a true work of love for the books. Masterpieces of cinema and a gift to the world.
My feelings exactly. But how do you feel about Arwen stealing Glorfindel’s part?!
I think Glorfindel got cheated.😡
Soon after ROTK came out, Elijah said he would have been happy playing Frodo for the rest of his life, because the story was so deep and profound.
"Story is what the plot is actually aBOAT." > Canadian spotted.
+invock Guilty as charged.
Random bigotry is random.
invock well you have found him OOT!
Ragitsu nah, it's not bigotry. As both a Canadian and a linguist, I can tell you that "about" actually *is* pronounced differently in Canada, just not to the ridiculous degree some people think. It's part of the Canadian accent, and if you're curious about it, you can look it up under the name "Canadian Raising". Hope you found that interesting!
Copy, you have permission to shoot.
I want to kick my past self for being frustrated at the ending of this movie when I saw it in the theater. It took me years to finally appreciate its true significance.
Wait till you love Justin Bieber in 2030, you'll be amazed :D
@SolusBatty lmao
At least you get it now.
REKT!
. and having saw the girl's profile picture, you try to create an opportunity to bash the lonely sad man bashing her in her defense like her white knight in hope that she contacts you to hang out, but only to find out that's how you'll get in her cyberfriendzone. Do you understand?.. I can't believe I'm enjoying this to 😂
A lot of people don't the scene in Rivendel because it didn't spell out what was going on.
For those who still don't understand it, *Frodo thinks he's dead and is sort of okay with it.*
*The last thing Frodo remembers is being on that rock in Mordor waiting for the end, then golden fucking eagles carry him off the angelic elven city and then he wakes up next the Wizard he definitely saw die in the only place Frodo knows of, that remotely resembles heaven.*
He's both relieved and saddened to see his old friend again, but then one by one the others show up.
*To them it's obvious they won and everyone survived so no one brings it up, but to Frodo, he thinks he and friends paid the ultimate price for freedom and what breaks his heart is the idea he got Sam killed to.*
it's only when Elron walks in that the matter is cleared up and Frodo realises the truth and farce is over.
I think Elijah Wood did a great job conveying this, but it would seem I am in the minority.
The NetherOne T H I S !
THAT IS DEEP STUFF
I think you mean Minas Tirith?
I have NEVER noticed this!! Thank you for sharing!!
I've never disliked that scene, but I love this reading of it.
The movie's plot ends when Sauron is defeated: the trilogy's story ends when Frodo overcomes his PTSD.
There is no indication that Frodo ever got over the wound the Ring gave him. (It's much too facile to call it PTSD.) The very reason he left is because he _couldn't_ get over it, and no one ever knew what happened to him after he left.
@@Serai3 (He got all better when he went to magic elf land.) The ringscar is an unsubtle fantasy take on PTSD; and if you think PTSD is facile, then perhaps you should volunteer to assist some veterans in need.
@@bronsonmcleod1449 Nope, sorry. Nowhere in the story, either in the books or the movie, does it say he got better. That's because there was nobody who ever came back. You can tell yourself he did, but Tolkien never said he got better, only that he HOPED to get better. Tolkien's story had little to do with happy endings, as he thought they were an immature way to end a story.
@@bronsonmcleod1449 And I NEVER said PTSD was facile. If you'll read my comment again, you'll see I said that CALLING WHAT HAPPENED TO FRODO that was facile. Tolkien himself said it was not the same thing as shell shock (the original name for the condition), but much deeper and impossible to heal anywhere in Middle Earth. That is exactly WHY he had to leave. He didn't WANT to leave - he HAD to leave.
LOTR is not a modern story, and it was never intended to be an allegory of any kind, including the idea that Frodo's wound was anything that anyone could experience again. What happened to him was unique, which is why no cure existed or would ever exist in Middle Earth.
@@Serai3 'As for Frodo or other mortals, they could only dwell in Aman for a limited time -- whether brief or long. The Valar had neither the power nor the right to confer 'immortality' upon them. Their sojourn was a 'purgatory', but one of peace and healing and they would eventually pass away (die at their own desire and of free will) to destinations of which the Elves knew nothing.' -Letter 246
He [Tolkien] was referring to the parts of Arda marred by Morgoth, not Middle Earth as a physical entity; the former does not include Valinor/Aman.
That being said, Tolkien is hardly omniscient: there's more parallel in what he wrote than he ever admitted. Or would you also say there's no parallel between LotR's "Noman-Lands" and WWI's infamous "No Man's Land", merely because Tolkien refused to admit the influence the World Wars had on his writing?
Théoden's speech.
"A red day. A sword day. And the sun rises"
When they start to yell "death" and it cuts to merry and éowyn shouting it too... UGH IT GETS ME
I've never felt like Return of the King was too long, for precisely this reason. LOTR is an emotionally absorbing story that needed a long denouemont; when you're as invested in these characters like I was, you feel mounting frustration for every unanswered question and every unaccounted fate. This was actually the thing that I hated the most about an ending to another epic trilogy, but to speak it's name would be to summon it's awful presence.
Isaac Taylor damn now i gotta know what trilogie u mean
He's probably talking about Mass Effect.
He was talking about the Matrix.
I can definitely see it being _The Matrix_ films he was talking about. I enjoyed all three, but they really got lost somewhere along the way. _Reloaded_ was pretty good, and could be mostly salvaged as is with a few minor tweaks, but _Revolutions_ missed too many little things, and many big things, that it is just bad.
My understanding is that the Wachowskis intent was to do _one_ sequel and one prequel, that may have been better. I have not seem them, but there are fan edits that combine _Reloaded_ and _Revolutions_ into a single film and I have heard that most are infinitely better. As to the prequel, a feature length version of _The Second Renaissance_ showing the creation of the machines, their subjugation, attempts at peace, the war, and human subjugation more fully with human and machine characters that we would follow over the course would be interesting.
The two problem that the studio, as I understand it, had with the prequel is that it would A) not feature the bankable heros of the last film and B) give more sympathy to the machines. Something that the studio feared would drive away viewers.
Aldrich Leblanc
I do have to disagree with you there. I like a number of their films myself, but I do know that some are a bit of an acquired taste.
Lord Of The Rings is so incredible.
nothing will ever be like it
Indeed
I hope more versions of this story will be filmed someday. It's much too classic to have only one iteration. I want to see different filmmakers take it on and see what they come up with.
@@Serai3 none of them will compare to PJs let’s be honest
@@ogbee9690 You have no basis whatsoever for saying that, given that none of them actually exist yet. If you like this one, fine, but saying nothing else could ever be as good is just declaring that you have no intention of giving any other version a chance. That's like saying no other version of Hamlet could possibly be as good as the original staging in the 16th century - it's nonsense.
@@Serai3 fine, it’s EXTREMELY unlikely any other version will turn out as great as PJ’s. Happy now?
Seriously, I don’t know what you expect. the cast and crews camaraderie, they were all extremely likable and kind to one another, the amount of passion involved, HOWARD SHORES SCORE, the beautiful breathtaking landscapes, the attention to detail, the amount of emotion.
Idk how you expect that to be topped.
I think the "end already" idea comes from how it transitions from scene to scene. If I recall correctly (and its been a while since I last watched it) the scenes regularly end with a fade out. I definitely remember - when first watching it in the cinema - that as the camera faded out on Mount Doom, I thought "oh shit, is that where its going to end? Too fast man!" but then it didn't end, fortunately.
Without knowing at what point it would end, the scenes kept ending as if they were about to cut to credits. When you don't know what the final scene is, then that affects the way you perceive the flow. You get the "exhale moment," as you prepare for credits and then it keeps going. Then it does it again. You bob up and down emotionally as you keep expecting it to end and it doesn't.
Now once you know the final scene and are watching it for a subsequent viewing, all that is gone, because you now know when the end is coming. At this point, you can see the narrative more clearly and the ending makes perfect sense. But on first viewing, its almost like a bait and switch as you continually fail to successfully predict that final fade to black.
I ALWAYS thought this! That fade out edit was the reason everyone thought it was too long: because they were tricked into thinking multiple times that it was going to fade to credits! If that transition wasn't there, I honestly don't think people would have complained as much.
The idea that it takes too long started when ROTK was released to theaters. It was four hours long and none of the theater owners wanted to schedule an intermission. When you're sitting there full of Pepsi, the movie does indeed never seem to end! (That's true, by the way. I remember being careful not to drink anything because I knew I'd be miserable in a couple of hours.)
It's truly amazing that people still go back to the Lord of the Rings movies and always have something new to say. In a time where things Marvel movies or Star Wars anthology movies seem to be the rage none of them hold a candle to the masterpiece trilogy.
Absolutely. For all that's it's a fantasy set in a fantasy version of our world, it deals with the issues of war and violence and sacrifice and heartache in a FAR more adult way than any of the superhero junk you see nowadays. That's why so many people think Frodo is "weak" or "boring" - because real emotion and the real fallout from such horrors have no interest for them. They want to see unrealistic Hollywood versions of life, not honest portrayals of what war leads to.
I heard it said that the movie has three endings, each important:
The Ring's end
The Fellowship's end (reunited)
The hobbits' end (especially Frodo and Sam)
The Ring's end
The Fellowship reunites
Aragorn is crowned
The hobbits reach the Shire
The hobbits have a drink in the bar
Sam gets married
Any of these could have been the ending.
I have to add the coronation of Aragorn. The film is called, "the Return of the King". So many long and difficult years for him.
"You bow to no one" still stands to this day as the greatest line ever delivered in range of a cinematic camera. Truly magnificent.
Seriously every time the scenes comes up I'm fighting back the tears.
Charlie Turk I've given up fighting long ago
Don't forget "for Frodo" Viggo is the perfect Aragorn
the only reason people say it was too long, myself included, is less about actual length and more about how the fade outs were messing with the people in the theater who thought they could get up to pee without missing anything lol.
I was so tickled when I learned how Tolkien wrote LOTR, because I've never heard of any other writer doing it this way: he started writing, got stuck, and instead of working out the problem and changing things, he started all over again. And he did that _every time he got stuck._ He would go back and rewrite from the beginning. So there are early versions of LOTR involving all kinds of plot points and characters that never made it to the finished product, there in their own little nests of story. :)
Still finished sooner than GRR Martin too
@@stuckupcurlyguy LOL, is that going to be the new version of "still a better love story than Twilight"? 😆
@@Serai3 no, it will in the end be “and still finished unlike GRRM”
@@heathenpride7931 Now, now. Let's not be hard on ol' George. The problem isn't his; the problem is his fans' infantile inability to be satisfied with the ending of a story.
@@Serai3 What ending is there to be dissatisfied with if he still has to write two or three books to finish the series?
I loved the ending. We just spent NINE hours with these characters struggling and despairing. I like that we're given an emotional, contemplative, almost therapeutic ending to coax us out of all the gloom and war we just traversed through.
People just have short attention spans 🤷🏾♂️
Not everyone though. Clearly, the fans of the film hasn't
ADD bro it sucks
you never know...
the movies don’t get hate though
I never got the too many endings complaints. So dumb.
even the extended edition is just the right amount of run time
Kyle Williamson Totally dude! You miss so many essential and moving scenes if you don’t watch the extended edition! My gosh these movies are soooooo good!
I agree that frodo not being happy when the ring is destroyed is about him feeling conflicted. It is true he is confused to some degree. It is probably true that he feels the pull of the ring still - and some regret that he could ultimately not defeat it on his own but only carry it.
But most of all I feel like he knows and has known for a while that while he might succeed in destroying the ring - he might not be able to come back. What he used to be - young frodo, the shire all of that is long gone. That dying of his old self began as far back as when he was stabbed with the morgul blade. He has spent himself as a charge, knowing he would not come back but still fighting the ring with superhuman determination. That was what held him up,. Now it's over. But he finds himself in the same place. His outer goal achieved but his inner journey at a dead end. It is not a question of getting some rest and gaining perspective. He has to become something different or wither away in the remaining darkness.
The jubilation as he wakes up fades into reality yes, but also into the tenderness of shared experience he has with Sam. Sam is the only true witness to Frodos ordeal . While Gandalf may better understand it's true reach and deeper significance - sam was there maintaining frodos core humanity through persistent love and friendship. Sam is at the root of where frodo is coming from and who he used to be and to whatever is left of that. Gandalf is at the root of where he will be going and what he will become. But he does not fully realise this yet.
As they receive the praise of Aragorn and the crowd I am not sure they feel like they do not deserve it. I think they feel the loneliness of knowing that this was never why they did it, and that these people will never know what it was they truly did. THeir experience is a deep and lonely and personal one that few can appreciate. And no amount of external recognition will change that. Once again - especially Frodos isolation is underscored.
Which leads me to my next point.
Frodo, like Gandalf has shed not only his ego but sacrificed all he used to be for the greater good, but also urged on by inner wounds and the threat of a spreading inner darkness. He is on the verge of becoming what some scriptwriters refer to as a crown chakra character (I am not into the chakra thing - but it's descriptive). Someone who has shed both his mortality and mortal identity. Other characters like that are Gandalf the white, who while still being Gandalf in some sense has become something slightly more impersonal and removed from the affairs and cares of mortal men (Dr Manhattan is another example of such a character). You still perceive some of their human identity but they are on their way somewhere else.
Frodo as he boards the final ship smiles and we see, finally, as he passes on a throwback to youthful frodo with no cares. The human part that loves his friends. The part that the ring very nearly completely destroyed. The part that can never be fully reconciled with the traumas he has experienced in this world and he is forced to move on. Sam cannot share this experience. He is at another level. Only in the undying lands can frodo retain some memory and semblance of what he once was while becoming something more which can contain the experience of darkness only by becoming something more fluid and layered and complex. But also - to the human heart - something slightly more dissociated and aloof.
so theres a late nigh novel forya
whynottalklikeapirat Thanks for making me cry a second time after this review already brought me to tears. Why would you do that?
whynottalklikeapirat That was wonderful. I’m so glad I decided to read.
Great analysis man
amazing. gotta screencap this ;^^
So it is like when Aang went with the guru to unlock the avatar state, but instead of running away like Aang he smiles a last goodbye to his friends
Having seen these films so many times now, I've never caught the fact that Frodo did not truly smile again until the very end or the significance of it.
I don't think Frodo's smile is indicative of any healing. I think he smiled because he knew his friends would never see him again, and he didn't want them to remember him weak and in pain - he wanted them to remember him looking with love on those he loved most. It's what you do for someone you love, after all.
@@Serai3 shit, now I'm crying again
The story of Lord of the Rings is more than only Frodo's arc.
But it is predominantly his arc.
True. Frodo's is the most in-your-face, but most characters certainly had arcs. My personal favorite is Sam's combo non-arc of absolute loyalty and arc of self-confidence. M&P's arcs of growing up and being responsible, Aragorn's arc of choosing a path & letting others choose theirs, L&G's arcs of racism, the list goes on for almost all characters.
UltimateKyuubiFox
Not at all: it’s a split between Aragorn and his inheritance, Frodo and Sam, Sauron himself and Saruman.
Additionally, if you’ve read the books, the entire mythos is Morgoth’s/Melkor’s story with Lord of The Rings being his lasting impact before he returns.
yes but Frodo´s arc is the most important aspect of the plot
@@isaaccarranza1461
The story is about overcoming evil by working together, trusting each other and sacrificing yourself. That doesn't work at all if you focus too much on Frodo.
Everything which is done by members of the fellowship of the ring is very relevant for the story.
Frodo's role is kind of special because he deals the final blow, but that would not have been possible without the trust of the others. Most of them were willing to sacrifice themselves in the battle at the Black Gate for his success and Sam was willing to share frodo's fate.
In addition, Frodo's victory would have been irrelevant if the orcs had already overran all the free peoples of Middle Earth, which was also prevented by his fellows.
writers of game of thrones should have watched this video before finishing season 8
And season 7, both were horrible
@Dark Wizard Hahahah.
SkylitHorizon haha
Game of Thrones is terrible. All of it.
@dopey monk it's not supposef to make logical sense for godssake it's a fantasy
"You bow to no one"
Gets me in the feels every time
You need way more subs. Keep up the good work.
ionplgr Thanks! I'm working on it!
+Sage Rants While I am bumbed out that you don't like my favorite actor (Leo DiCaprio) and that you were not a fan of The Revenant (a movie I now see as the best movie ever made) I still love your videos and I think you are one of the best youtubers around! Keep up the good work!
just got a new one :) keep up the amazing work! you're wonderfully insightful
What writers should learn: *you will literally never write anything better than these books*
Harsh bro!
Asoiaf?
@@sinisterkrex6465 I feel like they are on a similar scale but they play with fantasy in such a different way that it does nobody justice to compare them 1v1.
Dune was better.
@Thanos the Farmer I'm talking about the books, not the TV series.
You are spot on. The ending is not long, it's just perfect. Frodo's depression after the ring is destroyed is incredibly emotional and powerful. I almost wish it was longer. Or have it's own mini movie prequel.
Just rewatched the trilogy and this essay came to mind at the ending. I appreciate the point you're trying to make, but Frodo actually does smile a few times before the very end: when they arrive home, when Sam makes his move with Rosie, and at Sam and Rosie's wedding. I get the point you're trying to make, but it's up to interpretation, of course, because he does show happiness before his story ends.
I think Nostalgia Critic summarized it best in that the problem with these five endings was the editing/fakeouts: the blacks outs and the zoom outs all make it seem as though it is about to end so many times that it brings you out of the story. Still needed, just needed to be edited a bit better?
I pretty much agree with that.
Agreed but the editing wasn't too great in a lot of parts (i.e. Denethor's hallucination of Boromir) but at the same time I think I get it. The fade to black was almost a deep breath as well as a passage of time. As the source material was used, it could also be the cheapest way to film the end while being understood by the audience.
that sums it up for me too. I hope that it was the editing that annoyed audiences rather than what was happening. because it kept doing things that made it look like it was about to end such as fading to black or zooming out or having the music slowly fade to silence
jhibbitt1 well it ended a couple times...one ending for the action heroes, one for the new world order, one for the hobbits, one for the Eldar ....
Thats so well put.. I agree
Time to be nitpicky:
I'd argue that Frodo's choice to abandon Charadras and move through Moria is story driving =p
We see him act as a common hobbit for one of the last times, choosing comfort over hardship, even knowing that said hardship was a better choice.
As a result of his allowing the longing for comfort to overcome the good sense that was following Gandalf's advice, Frodo ends up seeing a friend die and going through a much harder experience than he had signed up for.
Later on we never again see Frodo letting the common hobbit love for comfort before all things control his decisions, he doesn't stall before leaving the Fellowship alone and even initially rejects the idea of a helper. Frodo grew at the loss of Gandalf in a manner he would have not if they had crossed the mountains as intended.
The entire Moria fuck up with goblins and the Balrog was an accident. While it was risky to cross it, it was totally possible to do so without being noticed, and still better than falling from a mountainside. Gandalf knew it, and Frodo was aware that Charadras was a no-go.
I don't think Moria for Caradras was 'the comfortable way out'. Gandalf was afraid Saruman had already calculated his every move. By leaving the decision up to Frodo, Gandalf neutralized the advantage Saruman had from knowing his mind.
The musical piece for Frodo's leaving is so amazing and perfect for what the tone of the scene represents
It's the perfect mix of happiness and depression all at once
When someone says the ending of Return of the King was too long I tell them they’ve taken too much oxygen.
"It ends too slowly."
"That's because you WATCH too slowly!"
(h/t _Lust for Life)_
Return of the King of Analysis. Nice job!
Thank you! You've more than earned my sub. I'm always glad to find people who actually understand films and film making.
Return Of The King had the best ending
I know this is an old video, but this channel is exactly the type of content I've been looking for. Thanks!
I remember when watching the film the audience began to get a little restless after the 3rd fade out or so, but I think if you know there's more to come or at least rewatch the film, you see the utter brilliance of all the endings. I'm glad to hear more people like it and cry buckets. No matter how many times I've rewatched ROTK, once Sam says he can't carry the ring but he can carry Frodo, the tears begin and basically don't stop! From them laying on the rock in each other's arms, the reunion, the bowing, Frodo leaving and turning around and smiling, Sam with his beautiful family... just TEARS!
4:32 People laughed at that scene?
I never realized that aspect, I always thought Frodo was just concerned over how to tell Bilbo the ring is gone.
-_- waitingDAY Yeah it makes sense, that's how it has to be. I was very young when I first saw the movies and read the books, and it didn't dawn on me until much later that Gollum was close to breaking free of the ring, because Frodo believed in him.
Sam Wise the brave is who made Gollum remain as he was. When he woke up and accused Gollum of sneaking. When in fact he was having second thoughts about taking Sam and Frodo through Cirith Ungol. He actually strokes Frodo while hes sleeping.. As Gandalf said..'' Smeagols life was a sad story.''
I saw it in the theater and yeah, everyone got a laugh out of it. This is just the instant reaction when people aren't putting a lot of thought into it, noticing Frodo's reaction, etc.
It is funny but it’s not funny in a “HAHA DUMB OLD IDIOT” way, but just amusing because Frodo went through so much. It was funny to see someone who didn’t really know what he went through ask him about it, and watch him lie since there was no way he could quickly explain all the trauma he just went through.
I feel that Frodo's jubilation didn't fade because he was brought back to reality. I feel like, seeing Sam, good Ol' Sam, was just such a pure moment. They made it together. They survived. Together. That's a special kind of brotherhood.
The most tear jerking moment for me is actually in The Two Towers, when king Theoden weeps at his son's grave and says: "No parent should have to bury his own child" :-( The endings are more heartwarming for me :)
I’ve always thought the ROTK had the best movie ending to a franchise. It gives you time to see the characters. Ease yourself down from the ring being destroyed.
Other franchises would’ve had them destroy the ring, have their meeting in the bed at Rivendell, and rolled the credits.
Not just the ending but the ending credits are brilliant as well. The combination of the song Into the West and the portraits of all the characters makes me teary every time.
Yes. I usually cry right through "into the west", and when the song is over I get up to turn the TV off, thinking I'm done with crying... And then the shire theme plays again. Instantly in tears, can't help it.
THANK YOU for making this! I remember sitting in the theatre watching this completely rapt, willing it to never end hahaha. I always thought I was biased because my favorite parts of stories are the beginnings and the ends and I am always sad when the endings are cut too short. But I am happy to see that not EVERYONE hates the long ending! It's a trilogy, you can't just cut it off!
RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK is another good example of a movie where the climaxes of both the plot and the story happen at the same time. The plot is about Indiana Jones in a race to find the Ark of the Covenant before the Nazis. The story as it's presented is a continuous game of oneupsmanship between Indy and Belloq, his rival and as (Belloq himself puts it) his "shadowy reflection". From the opening and throughout the movie Indy gains an artifact, and Belloq through shadier methods steals it away. It's a constant back and forth between them and even Marion gets caught in it with Belloq tries to take her from him. The plot climaxes with the Ark finally being opened and unleashing the wrath of God on the Nazis. Simultaneously the story climax is Indy survives because he closes his eyes and doesn't look at it, while Belloq does and is destroyed.
Also while the plots of both RAIDERS and INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE are similar(Indy races against the Nazis to find a powerful religious artifact), the story is different. LAST CRUSADE is about Indiana Jones repairing relationship with his estranged father. The climax of the plot is when the antagonist, Donavan drinks from the false grail and is destroyed. The climax of the story is Indy's dad finally calling Indy by his chosen name and not "Junior" and telling him to let the Holy Grail(the thing Henry Sr has been searching for his whole life) to let it go and drop into a chasm.
I think the story climax of Raiders is deeper than that. It's about faith. Indy didn't believe in the powers of the Ark, he was motivated by personal reasons (Prof. Ravenwood) but that all changed when he finally had an "arc" of his own when he told Marion to close her eyes as the Ark was opened.
I just discovered your channel and it is awesome! Keep the work going, Man!
4:53 that freakin' score. It's been years since I've seen the movies and I think that score pays off so much after seeing all the films. It's sad, memorable, freeing, and sweet,
yes UGH IT Gets me right here ❤
Most people have no idea how incredibly important soundtracks are. Music literally tells you _what_ to feel during a film. Years ago, I got to see a screening of a movie that didn't have a soundtrack yet, and weirdly enough, I had no idea what kind of movie it was supposed to be. Was that supposed to be funny? Was that a joke? Is this a comedy or not? It wasn't until I saw the film on release that I realized _nothing_ about it was supposed to be funny, and it was the music that told me that. If you ever have the chance to do that, jump at it. It's an incredible lesson in filmmaking!
"The jubilation... fades". And yet when Frodo sees Sam, he feels an even deeper kind of joy: that of remembering the true friendship he has established with Sam after all they've been through together.
I never cried when the ring was destroyed. I always start crying when Sam enters the room, and start weeping like a bitch when Frodo says he's leaving, too.
I use, 'Do you think the LOTR's ending was too long?' as a test of a true fan. If they say no they passed, if they say yes- get out of here! Why wouldn't you want a proper ending to this trilogy you've supposedly been invested in for 9+ hours? The only 'unnecessary' ending was Sam back with his family, but that one was pure book honour, ending it the same as the book.
Why can't a shorter ending count as proper?
Because how could you wrap up an entire nine/ten hour long series in a short amount of time and do it any justice?
Well StarWars wrapped a 3 movie trilogy with about 2 minutes of Ewok partying. To paraphrase one of my other posts if I were writing the screenplay myself I'd have cut the eagle-rescue to a few brief shots with just a second of black in-between, I'd keep the scene where Frodo wakes up and the one where Aragorn gets crowned then the final return to the shire would just be a quick montage of shots linked and explained by a voiceover from Frodo then ending with a distance-shot of all the hobbits coming out of their homes to see the 4 returning characters. maybe also the final shot could be Sam & Rose's wedding with the camera panning upwards.
Personally, Star wars and LOTR aren't comparable for me, one is based on an incredibly dense and detailed book and the other is more an action flick in space. Having a montage for a trilogy where every other important moment was fully fleshed out and developed would have been inadequate and not emotionally fulfilling.
Maybe. Personally I got my fulfilment from Frodo waking up back in Minas Tirith with the other fellowship characters and Aragorn kissing Arwen. Everything else which happened after that just felt like winding down the story.
I love the multiple endings of ROTK, and I only ever watch the extended editions, I haven't bothered with the cinematic versions since first seeing them.
I will respectfully disagree with you on leaving out "the Scouring of The Shire" That chapter was the summation of what Tolkein wrote about; that everything changes after war..even the Shire. Frodo came home to what he believed was something untouched...it was not. If Peter Jackson left it in, it would have given Frodo's smile (of which I agree that's the actual journeys' end) a deeper and fully understood meaning.
but that's my .02$
Thomas Korn I agree
Another thing that chapter does is move the people of the Shire into engagement with the broader world. The hobbits of the fellowship return and model the virtues of adventurous, engaged life by being the tips of the spears that drive out Saruman, and they also enable the other hobbits to find out the true quality of their collective and individual characters. And once Saruman is defeated, the Shire actually becomes a better place. It is important that the heroes return to share the benefits of their victory with the community. Jackson's decision to leave out the Scouring of the Shire betrayed that important step a little. But, of course, unsung heroes are noble too, and that is what Jackson gives us in his adaption.
I think it has a greater effect in the books than it would have in the movies since as book readers we have already seen Bilbo come back to an untouched Shire from his adventure
I wasn't really a fan of it in the book. It's true that it shows that war reaches every corner, but I also felt it distracted from the personal growth of the four Hobbits. In the movies, they come home to a Shire that's unchanged, but that allows you to see the effects of the saga on these characters. It's like a war vet coming home to a country that's the same as when they left, but they've changed so much inside that they never see life the same way. You also see more clearly how much the ring wounded Frodo and Sam. The Shire is as peaceful and beautiful as ever, but it does nothing for the unrest in Frodo's heart. It's harder to show that when Frodo's back to running around wielding a sword.
My first reaction when I read that portion of the book was utter disbelief. I had spent the entire time in the belief that the Shire would remain untouched. Then all of a sudden, it's Saruman's industrial fiefdom. It cut my legs out from under me. Looking back, it was an incredibly truthful ending to a story written by a man who lived the terror of the Somme. Nothing is unscathed by war.
As a fellow writer who's just discovered your channel, my hat is off to you for the wonderful analysis. Cheers.
Wow. Really eye opening. A very clear explanation of the difference between plot and story, I love it. Your videos are so excellent.
agree. I'm so tired of people saying the ending is too long
Dear sir, thankyou for this video. It has assuaged the aggravation I have had stir in me for 14 years, every time I have heard someone complain about LOTR, and use that irksome phrase of it "having too many endings". Because I adore the ending! I remember the moment of being in the cinemas, after the ring is destroyed, and Frodo and Sam coming out to sit on that rock, and Frodo declaring it was done, then embracing Sam and the screen fading to black; I remember so clearly in that moment my body tensing up and my inner voice screaming "Don't let that be the end! Don't let that be the end! Pllllleeeaase, let that not be the end!", because it would have been so unsatisfying to me. It would've ruined the movies for me, somewhat.
I cared about the characters. The ring was just a device to push the characters along in all they did. I didn't watch it for the ring to be destroyed. I watched it for the characters.
I personally find the ending perfect.
I left the cinema satisfied (and crying like a baby).
And now that I've seen The Hobbit, the ending is even more perfect, because it gave a resolution to Bilbo's character as well!
Anyway, I've rambled enough. It was just such a delight to watch a video on the subject, and hear someone else say everything what I feel about it - but more succinctly, haha.
I love the ending of Return of the King! I think it's probably the best ending ever because it gives an epic story a satisfactory conclusion.
I usually feel endings are underwhelming and wish more were as long as this one.
When I first saw the movie in theaters, it was a weird ending, I was waiting for Frodo to smile. It took a lot of time for him to actually do it and it left something in me. I connected with him in a way. I thought, at that period of my life, that I was more like Sam. But I felt sympathy for Frodo when he described a faraway land that he could never really go back to. Things would never be normal again for him and that affected me.
The scouring of the Shire was actually my favorite part of the whole series, though. They cut it for the same reason they cut old Tom Bombadil out. Run time. It has no impact on the rest of the plot, so cutting it for the sake of run time is an easy decision.
Not to mention the time to develop more characters. The scouring of the shire would have been far too weak without at least some of the main actors other than Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin, but then you need time to introduce them. Same reason that, in The Two Towers, the elves came to reinforce King Theoden's men at Helms Deep while Eomer and his men were in exile, only to brought in as the (literal) cavalry to save the day by Gandalf - following the book and having Eomer at Helm's Deep instead of the elves would have meant they'd need to spend extra time to introduce Erkenbrand so his timely arrival wouldn't be a _deus ex machina._
mastick
The Scouring of The Shire is at the end of the story, long after the hobbits are introduced and developed
@@hyperion3145 I don't think you picked up my point. The hobbits _en masse_ are introduced, and the main four (Frodo, Sam, Merry, and Pippin) developed well before where the Scouring of the Shire would have come in the films had they included it. But Tom Cotton (Rosie's father) plays a major part in the Scouring, and Lobelia Sackville-Baggins' character development is also a big part (in impact if not in total words). Without them, especially Lobelia, I think the story of it would have been far too weakened to be worth including.
I know it’s so awsome
Cutting out the Scouring actually makes the ending more poignant, as the hobbits go back to being just ordinary hobbits, rather than heroes who saved the Shire. That scene in the bar where they all look at each other, knowing that nobody in the Shire knows what happened - it kills me every time.
Now I love the ending even more!
I completely agree. It infuriates me when people whine about the ending. "It has too many endings!" I only counted one ending, when it said "THE END".
Of the whole trilogy, Return is probably my favorite movie for the reasons mentioned in the video.
I have watched and obsessed over these movies for my entire life and I learned something new about them today. Thank you
Thank you sir! That smile from Frodo is literally my favorite moment in the whole trilogy (except maybe the Ride of the Rohirrim) but I've never quite understood fully why it's such an incredibly and tear jerking moment. Thank you for such a concise and clear explanation!
"You bow to no one..." - Literally a shock through the body, hairs rising and my eyes feeling wet. Less than a fucking second. I should really rewatch this. It's been years. I almost feel ashamed.
I burst into tears the first time I saw that. There was enthusiastic applause from the audience - it felt so right and fitting.
the ending in the book was way longer. Unfortunately the pivotal scouring of the shire was left out
@theanonymous memester I have to agree. As much as i love the books and want the films to be as close to them as possible, you have to recognize the difference between the two types of media. In a movie you have much less time and have to pay much closer attention to the development of rising and falling tension. After the big bang that is the destruction of the ring, adding in another conflict in the end, seemingly out of nowhere (the films wouldn't have time to set it up anyway) might work in a book, but in a movie would be just completely out of place. It is unfortunate that in deleting this scene, the message of war having terrible repercussions right to your doorstep, even in the most innocent of places regardless of if you win or lose, is somewhat lost, although i think they did quite well, showing that in the second movie with rohan being raided, aswell as frodo and sam being changed as a person so much upon their return.
@@kreia187 You raise excellent points regarding the Scouring of the Shire's worth in the books. Please permit me to add one more.
It related to themes of isolationism that are prevalent throughout LotR. Which is mentioned as early as the chapter "Three is Company" from Fellowship. The elf that Frodo meets says directly that The Shire is part of the greater world, whether they like it or not, and they can't fence it out forever. The Shire was never as pure as it's often depicted. Every town of hobbits considers every other town of hobbits to be a bunch of weirdos, and that only their own town has respectable hobbits. An isolated region was slowly breaking down into smaller, more isolated communities. Which is exactly what Saruman preyed on.
Saruman, ultimately, was defeated by four hobbits that did not stay in their own lane. Who were worldly and experienced, and did not readily discount the ways of others. The Shire was not returned to what it was before, but filled with new plantlife from the gift Sam brought home. And honestly, I think that's kind of beautiful.
Damn, this is actually really, really, interesting. One thing, though - personally, I'd call the two sections 'plot' and 'character' lines. 'Story', for me, is the entire thing overall, all aspects included.
I just finished watching it again and I was trying to explain to my son why I thought that the long ending was necessary. You have articulated my thoughts perfectly. Plot vs story. Thanks.
Great observation on the smile/lack of smile at end.. I've seen the film's hundreds of times and never noticed the subtext of that scene.. brilliant
What? There are people who think TLOFR ending is too long? I have never heard anyone say that, seriously. I think people who would say that are people who wouldn't bother watching the entire trilogy to begin with.
@Gary Allen Who is this guys?
The only "too long" I EVER heard in relation to the movies was after The Fellowship of The Ring, when I overheard a guy at the theater say he was running out the next day to buy the books because two years was too long to wait to find out how it ended.
@@Danny__Noble People who said about multiple endings clearly haven't read the book. Tolkien was literally spanning more than 100 pages for ending(s).
The most common criticism regarding the ending is that when adaptin a book to a movie, you should make some changes, and the ending shouldn't drag on like that after the final battle is over.
While I understand where this is coming from, these people should try to understand that every single moment from that ending is important to conclude all the things that were still open after the destruction of The Ring. If they had ended immediately, it would've been like The Hobbit trilogy where almost nothing has a conclusion after the battle is over.
Rivershield Imagine if PJ had included the scouring of the shire in the trilogy, audience had walked out from the theater in the middle of the movie!! XDDD
My main issue with the ending was the black screens between the different sections--so it looks, sounds, and feels like the transition between the last scene and rolling the credits. Remember, this movie is well over 3 hours, so pretending the movie is over and then it ISN'T over for another 15 minutes is seriously just taunting your bladder when you see it in the theatre. And THEN you keep getting sucker-punched with the feels, so you leave the theatre rushing for the nearest restroom and trying to look like you weren't bawling during an action/adventure movie.
I agree, they should have found a more graceful way to handle the transitions.
I never found watching that ending to be frustrating. I actually don't know if my dad came up with this himself or read it somewhere, but when he introduced me to LOTR when I was a kid, he explained that all those black screens are points at which you, the viewer, can choose your own ending. I think the reason, as you put it, it feels like it's "pretending the movie is over", is because all the black screens could very well be where the film ends and it wouldn't be that huge of a deal.
But, as JustWrite put it, the actual story ends with Frodo getting on the ship.
I think the black screens were amazing. Especially right before the eagles appeared to recover Sam and Frodo. THAT black screen was absolutely brilliant.
It wouldn't be the same without it.
Wow... you changed my opinion, and earned a subscriber.
Fantastic analysis. There is one quibble/disagreement I have, though maybe we agree a little bit after all on this. At 3:22, I never thought the celebration was undercut by Sam entering the room. For Frodo, it's different. He's not frowning, his smile doesn't disappear, it just changes. One of the major story trends of the series was Frodo's and Sam's platonic love. It's only deepened by their mutual survival on Orodruin. So while Frodo enjoys the antics of Merry and Pippin, and is happy to see Gandalf again, the appearance of Sam is a little more special for him. I don't think it's a sorrow/sadness there, at least, rewatching this scene with that thought in mind, I'm not reminded of the discomfort they feel at the other celebrations.
Wow... a fantastic analysis. I knew in my heart of that but it was satisfying to be given the ammunition to debate someone (logically and intelligently) about WHY the Return of the King's ending is NOT too long! Thank you thank you thank you! Also, that is great advice to future book, story, and script writers!
AMEN!!! This is what I've wanted to say for the longest time! No one should ever say that Return of the King's ending is too long.
Similarly, I don't understand why people hate on Fury Road for having "no story". There is more character development there than in all four Transformers combined! Yes that doesn't say much, but every character in Mad Max was a well made character with actual motivation and story that drive the plot.
I didn't like it. I don't think an egalitarian society is automatically more virtuous than a warlike survivalist tribe in a post-apocalyptic reality. so I don't really get why we're supposed to root for the 'good guys' in mad max
Most emotional scenes in LOTR:
I cant carry it for you, but i can carry you.
You bow to no one.
Sams speech at the end og the two towers.
Ride of the rohirim.
Every scene in the trilogy!
It's funny how much I agree with the overall point-that the story is continuing after the plot has concluded-while I disagree with so many individual points you make. Then again, that's the thing about subtext-it's rich, but people can read many different things in it. My read of it is quite different while the overall idea is consistent.
When Sam walks in to see Frodo in the ending, for instance, that's not the moment the ending conflict begins. That's the two characters sharing a moment of respect and understanding because they were together the whole way, and there's nothing left for them to say about it. Frodo's emotions don't fall as Sam enters-there's some weird editing there to make it seem like the expressions are restrained, but there's a very much a knowing smile shared between the two characters.
Now let's go to the bowing scene. There is a message there in the expressions but it's slightly different than you said. Merry and Pippin are smiling nervously, a bit awkward and sheepish, because almost anyone would be. I don't think they feel it's deserved any more than Frodo, but what Frodo is realizing is that he can't take any joy in it. He doesn't feel connected to what's happening and what everyone is celebrating-the destruction of the ring-is, for him, a moment of great pain. And that's the moment when Frodo recognizes he is disconnected from the world, which is the through line of his ending. Again, it's similar, in that you're recognizing subtextual things are happening, but I think you're reading them wrong.
I don't see Frodo necessarily conflicted during Sam's wedding. You're not seeing memories of Mount Doom specifically there. What we DO see is that any mirth or joy Frodo ultimately does find is fleeting. He's truly happy for Sam, but Frodo gave everything he had just getting the ring to Mount Doom and he's a spent man. Sam's life is continuing but Frodo knows that his is not.
And I'd argue the story doesn't end with Frodo smiling at Sam, the climax of the story is Frodo handing the book to Sam and saying, "The last pages are for you."
The final line in Tolkien's classic is Sam saying, "Well, I'm back." Because while this story isn't a strict WWII allegory, it is still a war allegory, heavily influenced by Tolkien's own experiences in the first World War. Frodo is the soldier who survived but could never go home, suffering from PTSD and depression which are destroying the life he should have had. He sacrificed everything so that other people, Sam in particular, had a home to return to. Frodo is smiling not because he's defeated the ring, but because he's left the book, and symbolically the world, for Sam.
So illuminating - I've always confused story and plot and now I understand so much better!
Gotta be honest, my favourite part of the movie is the: Never thought I'd die fighting side by side with an elf. Line.
Very well done and appreciated.
paulsinob Thank you!
-What's your favorite movie?
-The Lord of the Rings.
-Oh yeah? which one?
-The Lord of the Rings.
The ending was absolutely perfect in my opinion. Your analysis only made me appreciate it more. It pulls at the heartstrings because you saw these characters interact with one another and grow for so long, and now, although the story of their lives continue, their story of the Ring closes. You see them struggle and fight throughout the entire series, so that at the end when you see them find peace again, one after the other, and Frodo too in the end, it just brings closure- like they truly deserve it. Frodo went through so much turmoil, and he was worrying throughout the entire series that he would never find that peace again. So like you said, when he steps onto that boat and smiles, THAT is the climax. Because despite all odds, despite him leaving his past life behind him forever, he is at peace. It brings me to tears every time. like one of the final lines in the movie say, "and the fellowship, though forever bonded by the ties of friendship, was ended" (paraphrased). The movie just made so sure to tie up ALL loose ends in the story. I love LoTR so much.
I watched the lord of the rings when i was very young. i hadnt the emotions which i have today, and i wasnt beable to think like im thinking today... watching the lord of the rings over and over gives me goosebumbs everytime, because now i think different and can emagine the pain and happyness, they have and the fears they had to get over. Nowadays i feel the same like frodo and sam. or even like boromir (I still dont like him). I know what it means to leave something behind or lose friends, even if i didnt really knew them or i just met.
The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit is like an world i really want to be in and dont want to be. A World full of Beauty, Friendship and trust and full of Sadness, hate and fears. But when i think about the emotions the charakters have at the moment and what they could think in moments of peace or war is calming to me. because now i know, it is normal to think about such things in different ways.
Tolkien made a world, people can relate to.
Destroying something everybodys hate but you could never do, cause you love it to much and it makes you feel good without knowing that its bad for you knows nearly everybody of us (i think).
Hearing the Soundtrack is like diving deeper and deeper in the world of Lord of The rings. The Soundtrack combines all aspects of Tolkiens world. The Fears, The War, The peaceful moments, nearly everything you can find in this world, charakters and all antagonists and gives us a world we can relate to and can dream of.
And the way the story is written (told) is just one big masterpiece and the peoples which are complaining about the lenght of all 3 movies dont really know how to appreciate This Story.
Still my favorite movies and books
And... sorry for my english ^^
Things I love more than life itself:
5) Music. (Into the West is the last song I listened to before my Dad died 5 minutes later.)
4) My cats.
3) The Return of the King.
2) The Two Towers.
1) The Fellowship of the Ring.
I believe a lot of people had the “End Already” feeling because of the way society has become.
We as a society have become less about the journey and more about the destination. I personally loved the ending and loved the journey, but in today’s face paced world, where everything is go go, make money, immediate satisfaction, fast food mentality, many minds have been geared in a way that they don’t want to think deeply, they just want to be told. They don’t want to stop and smell the roses so to speak.
I feel it’s a shame. We have so many modern conveniences and life has become about getting huge careers with lots of money, we have forgotten to slow down and see the beauty that money and career is suppose to bring
I thought you were going to talk about the LOTR books haha
With a thumbnail from the films...
He should have
I couldn't put it in words but, when watching that movie, I felt it. Thanks for completely putting it into words and video.
Thank you for understanding the importance of the ending of this film. I loved every minute of it, personally.