MovieChat Forums > The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) Discussion > Why the ending works

Why the ending works

posted 8 years ago by dijomaja-382-516639
22 replies | jump to latest

There have been a couple of recent threads to the effect that the ending "didn't work" for one viewer or another. When we say something "didn't work for me" we're acknowledging that our expectations can get in the way.

Ultimately, this is a story about loss. Tolkien introduces us to an imaginary world, shows us why the saving of that world was worth sacrifice and then acknowledges that even the sacrifice won't save everything for everybody. This is difficult for modern audiences. We like happy endings (or dystopian worlds that suggest that nothing is worth saving).

My parents' generation saved our world from two totalitarian regimes but the world they inherited was not the world they remembered. My generation tried to build on their sacrifice, to make the world more just and fair, but most days it certainly doesn't seem like the world we imagined.

Tolkien lost most of his friends in one World War and had to watch his son go off to fight another. The ending of this story does not hold out false hope and I think that disappoints a lot of viewers who would like to see Aragorn's coronation followed by applause for the Hobbits and rolling credits. Life doesn't work that way and it's to Tolkien's and the filmmakers' credit that they didn't end the story that way.

[–] DoctorShemp 8 years ago

Too often do long/epic series have wayyy to quick endings. Im very pro-LOTR ending because it's balanced, you get a long wind down because it was a long tale. Im also a big Harry Potter fan but the way both the books and the movies ended you practically get whiplash. It's like "OK Voldemort's dead and btw the kids all grew up and had their own kids THE END!"

[–] dijomaja-382-516639 8 years ago

Right. As someone pointed out, we're seeing ten hours of film and the wrap-up involves many characters in different situations. As for the 'Harry Potter' films it seems that after the 2nd one the filmmakers were afraid of explanations. I don't know how people who didn't read the books figure out what happened.

[–] coolgit 8 years ago

Concur. The ending was the best of all films I'd seen.

[–] Dejay 8 years ago

I thought the ending worked very well. I don't even get why Frodo leaving middle earth was that sad. Afaik if he stayed, he would still become a ring wraith when he died.

From what I've read it's hinted that even Sam went to Valinor because he too carried the ring for a short while. So not sure if it was to ensure that no trace of the rings and saurons influence remained in middle earth or because of the morghul blade.

They are going to meet the Gods who created the world. It's not really sad imho.

And yes the ending is a long wind-down from the story. I don't especially enjoy the ending but it's kind of necessary.

BTW in the books there is a whole sixth act about saruman and the shire. A much less romantic and more political and grim ending. But it's good that they cut it for the movies.

[–] Otaku-sempai 8 years ago

I thought the ending worked very well. I don't even get why Frodo leaving middle earth was that sad. Afaik if he stayed, he would still become a ring wraith when he died.

Huh? No, Frodo was not going to become a Wraith when he died. However, his spirit was injured in a way that could not be healed if he remained in Middle-earth. The Undying Lands were the only place where he might find solace. What was sad was that he saved the Shire but not for himself, and that he would have to leave so many good friends behind.

"If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!" - The Joker

[–] Dejay 8 years ago

Might be something that I haven't read but just a theory that I had when I first watched the movie. "He's still going to turn, just slower". The wound never healed and still makes him sick so either part of the blade is still in his shoulder or it's a kind of infection or spiritual sickness. Wraith sickness. Not knowing the book, I don't think the theory is that far off.

The book also features Barrow-wights who are ghosts of diseased people. I think it's after Tom Bombadil. Maybe the "damage to his spirit" is basically the same. If he suffered and died here he could become like them, a malicious ghost.

PS: Ok the barrow wights actually don't seem to be ghosts.

[–] dijomaja-382-516639 8 years ago

No. Even the film is pretty clear that the threat of Frodo turning into a Wraith was past when he was healed by Elrond. The pain did stay with him and, as OS points out, the loss of the Ring made everything seem pointless. Some have noted the difference between Bag End in Bilbo's day - full of books, maps, pictures, food, etc. - and the last scenes with Frodo living in a home that already looks abandoned. Also, in that scene the accompaniment for the Shire Theme appears in the musical score but there's no melody. It's "empty".

[–] Dejay 8 years ago

Yeah you're probably right.

[–] dijomaja-382-516639 8 years ago

OK, but the point of the post was not to shoot anybody down. This is a complicated story and even long-time readers have different interpretations on some points. This just happened to be something where book and film are pretty much in agreement.

[–] Dejay 8 years ago

No problem :) I enjoy this discussion. Very unusual imdb board. I think it was some kind of theory that stuck in my mind from before reading the books and simarilion etc. Yeah nothing points to it but it could be possible. Of course most of these questions get answered because of the tons of supplementary material, letters and stuff by tolkien.

So I don't really have anything to say in support of the idea, just that it kind of fits as a metaphor. The physical wound that never healed is just like the psychological wound. It symbolizes what kind of damage was done, hence exit to valinor.

[–] magpie930 8 years ago

This is a great example, imo, about how an idea/theory about LOTR might be provably wrong but still worthy of consideration.

I've argued, in quite a few places, that it's important to understand and know the factual context and details of - in this case - an author and his works. But we can also use a piece of art - in this case, LOTR - as a matrix for exploration. It's hard to explain succinctly (and I am never succinct) but even when we get an idea that is wrong, we can use that idea to explore our own thoughts on life, our own experiences, how the story would have gone if things had been different, how this work differs from other works that went the way I thought this one was going.

So an idea might be 'wrong' in the context of what Tolkien intended but it's not necessarily worthless, if you get what I'm saying (and likely I'm not explaining myself well at all!).

One place I discussed this was on my soundtrack website. I tried to separate out understanding 'the composer's intention' from using the composer's work as a starting point for discussion that can fly far afield from the composer's intention.
http://amagpiesnest.com/similarities/musical_similarities_wagner.htm#DiscussingArt

I also wrote:

I vacilate between trying to understand Tolkien the man and how Tolkien crafted his stories and how they make me feel. Once I switch to 'how they make me feel', I take broader liberties with the stories. I'm not so concerned with being able to back up with citations and quotes my impressions. This is train of thought stuff. I once discussed how people deal with the loss of a loved one by comparing it to a void in one's being. Then I compared the effects of a void to the effects of a shadow. Then I wondered if Frodo suffered from a shadow on his being and how that might have prevented him from healing. There's not much to back up that discussion with citations or quotes. The purpose of a discussion like that is to use art to develop one's thinking in general. The art becomes a medium... a matrix to explore and attempt to answer life questions and issues.

What I'm hoping to do is encourage you not to stop having theories and ideas in the fear they might be wrong. I can assure you, those who are correcting you here are only trying to provide you and others with accuracy but none of them think having theories like this is foolish or anything. You've done some good thinking on the matter and that can provide for good conversation... even if it's not what Tolkien intended. :-)

[–] Dust_Indotex 8 years ago

The "Scouring of the Shire" is, IMO, opinion perhaps one of the best parts in the whole Trilogy. Because it's like the whole saga prepared the hobbits for saving their home. In The Hobbit (the book at least), and in the LOTR books, hobbits are portrayed as keeping to themselves with little to no contact with humans, dwarves etc. So the whole Trilogy (and also The Hobbit since Bilbo finds the Ring and thus sets forth the Hobbits journey in the Trilogy) is about the journey of the Hobbits and how it shaped Frodo, Sam, Pippin and Merry to save their homeland.

I know not the only LOTR fan who read the books and eagerly awaited the movies only to be sorely disappointed with Jackson not even writing/filming the Scouring of the Shire.

[–] WeirdRaptor 8 years ago

The theatrical cut of the film is already three and a half hours long. From the very beginning, I knew the Scouring of the Shire would never fit into a film narrative and fully anticipated losing it. A sham, yes, but the films are still great and always will be.

"All you have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to you." -Gandalf

[–] ZakkWyldeMyLittlePony 8 years ago

I liked the ending. The multiple endings were kind of annoying, but they weren't bad all the same.

Slipknot watches My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic

[–] dijomaja-382-516639 8 years ago

"Multiple endings" is sort of a catchphrase that caught on here. We're talking about three long films with lots of characters and sub-plots. The different fates of several civilizations are being decided. It takes time.

But the original point, now lost, was this: we're used to having the big "ending" to the story (usually happy except in dystopian sci-fi). Life, doesn't work that way, though, and the great stories from mythology remind us of this. The original example I used was that of my parents' generation. At the end of WWII they would have had every right to feel that the world had been saved, evil defeated, etc. Didn't happen. A traditional adventure movie version of LotR would have ended with Aragorn's coronation but that's not the story Tolkien was trying to tell. This is ultimately a story of what gets lost and what endures.

[–] magpie930 8 years ago

There's also a rhythm to the way this story is constructed... and ultimately concluded.

We start with Hobbits. We end with Hobbits. The development of the Fellowship and then the disbanding of that Fellowship, is a story within the larger story. We start out small, first Frodo and Sam. Then Merry and Pippin get added. Then Aragorn. And finally Gandalf, Boromir, Legolas, and Gimli.

In the book, we have the chapter 'Many Partings' where we say goodbye to chunks of the people who we've met in the book. Each of those is a parting... an 'ending'. Finally, we are left with just the four Hobbits (for the most part).

In the film, we 'end' that middle chunk at the coronation. We farewell those we met along the way till we're left with just the Hobbits again. That story is ended but not the larger one.

These moments are not a stop and start of endings. It's a series of parenthesis - bookcasing stories within stories.

When I wrote the description of action on screen to the music on the CD for the coronation scene, it became really apparent of what some that scene was doing.

The camera pans up to show throngs on the top level of Minas Tirith, then to the steps of the Citadel. As the music swells, Gandalf holds a crown over the head of Aragorn. Gimli looks at it in awe. (Our last close up shot of Gimli.) The Gondor Reborn Theme ends quiets dramatically as the crown is brought down and the horns play a noble Realm of Gondor Theme as Aragorn is crowned. Gandalf declares, "Now come the days of the King." The camera cuts to Aragorn's face. Gandalf adds quietly, "May they be blessed." The main Realm of Gondor Theme returns as Gandalf steps back and Aragorn stands up. Aragorn takes a big sigh and turns to face the crowd who cheer and clap. The camera moves from a close up of crowd back to Aragorn then quiets as Aragorn address the crowd. Cymbals shing as the crowd cheers and petals fall from the sky. Then, all quiets as the newly crowned King Aragorn sings the oath Elendil made upon leaving Númenor. Et Eärello Endorenna utúlien. Sinome maruvan ar Hildinyar tenn’ Ambar-metta! We see our last glimpse of Faramir, Éowyn, Éomer and then the Fellowship Theme plays quietly as we see Legolas, wearing the crown of princedom and leading a contingent of Elves. As the Fellowship Theme continues, they place a hand on each other's shoulder and Aragorn says, "Hannon le." The last time Aragorn thanked Legolas, it was for returning the Evenstar jewel to him at Helm's Deep. This time, Legolas gestures for Aragorn to look beyond him to Arwen. (Our last shot of Legolas.) We hear the last full statement of the Fellowship Theme.

That scene provides (among other things) a farewell to characters we've met along the way as well as the Fellowship Theme. But if it's an ending, it's just an ending to that story within a story.

[–] dijomaja-382-516639 8 years ago

Agreed. I think the whole "multiple endings" business became a catchphrase and, as with most catchphrases, people stopped thinking about the meaning. If anything, we really don't get much of an epilogue. The film doesn't give us "Many Partings" (itself a nice mirror of the "Many Meetings" chapter heading).

For me, the story, book and film, properly draws the curtain at Sam's "Well, I'm back".

I liked your pointing out of the two scenes in which Legolas literally and figuratively brings Aragorn the Evenstar. In thirteen years of re-watching this film I never realized that. Beautiful.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] magpie930 8 years ago

after I saw ROTK, way back in the day, I realized there were a whole bunch of these connected moments. I initiated a thread on another forum I called 'foreshadows and echos' and got a bunch of observations from people. Maybe I'll start a new thread to list some and folks can add their own comments, observations, etc.

[–] electric_storm 8 years ago

I think the ending works great from a thematic and story POV and I have no problem with the length. What I take issue with, as with much of RotK, is with the filmmaking choices. The transitions between scenes with the constant fading feels awkward and the film forces a few too many emotional sumnation moments down our throat within a short space of time. Frodo and Sam nodding at each other in the bedroom (this whole scene is overdone), everyone bowing to the Hobbits in Minas Tirith, then the whole emotion of the Grey Havens, then Frodo's voice-over etc... Just one or two of these moments would work for emotional catharsis.

[–] magpie930 8 years ago

a worthy thread to bump up in our final days.

[–] Gastonian (946) 7 years ago

I'd almost argue that the ending could have been longer. I think the ending we got was happy but also probably the best example of bittersweet as well. It will be interesting to see if GOT gets it right considering how wrong they got it in season 7.