Witch-King


Such a huge build up for such a letdown.

reply

I couldn't agree more, and it was just too easy. He didn't present any challenge for Eowyn or Merry.

reply

Three fucking movies, a lot of special effects, mystery, small screen time just for it to end in a joke.

reply

What pisses me off is Jackson totally didn't respect the source material and made so many changes that make zero sense, yet the stuff he actually keeps from the novel are the worst parts.

reply

I heard that it actually isnt his film and the producers just used his name to sell it. I agree. If you see his previous work it isn’t consistent with this movie. It is a lot more independent and intellectual.

reply

I see two idiots here ripe for Ignoring. Maybe I should do it.

reply

Wat

reply

Lolwut? Have you watched any of the hours and hours of behind-the- scenes material on the DVD/Blu-Ray release? He was involved in every inch of that production.

Do you think it had some phantom director? Who would use Peter Jackson's name to sell anything in 2000 anyway? Hardly anyone knew who he was before LOTR. These films MADE Peter Jackson.

reply

True. But it’s so strange. How this is so commercial and his earlier work was so independent. Heard it from a third party anyway.

reply

It's definitely a creative shift and I have wondered before why he was considered in the first place. He certainly wasn't the obvious choice.

reply

That’s why the suspicion of a puppet director. He was solely hired because his fat ass is from New Zealand. Might’ve been better had they hired a more established one.

reply

I think he did about as well as anyone could have with the trilogy, so I think he ended up being a great choice. Though it would be interesting to see how Spielberg or Ron Howard would've handled the same material.

reply

I think such a material couldve been well suited with an unknown independent with a lot of experience and ambitious.

reply

There is no joke. The point is that the Witch-King did not understand the prophecy. He thought it made him invulnerable. It didn't. All the prophecy was, as prophecies often are, was a very literal statement of the future. No man would kill him. But a woman, or a hobbit, would.

reply

If I remember correctly, the Witch-King died the same way in the books.

reply

Yea but his story just as boring and insignificant?

reply

Yes. I think at the time it was written it was significant because of Eowyn's involvement. Nowadays, that's a shrug.

reply

Yea. That’s how I feel.
Just a shrug.

reply

[deleted]

Huge Buildup?

He was only given prominence in the middle of the the 3rd movie as Gandalf narrates how Sauron has embued TWK with more deadly power to represent him in his attack on Minas Tirith. The ensuing battle shows how treacherous he has become and he killed King Theoden.

If the Witch King was hyped up in Fellowship of the Ring then I'd get your point, but he wasn't so there's no real letdown

reply

Lack of iconic villains is one of the problems with the story. I think that's why they went crazy with all that nonsense in the Hobbit movies. There just ain't no Emperor of all space to hurl down an exploding well in LOTR. Just a grubby little gollum.

reply

I can agree about that. Sauron is the ultimate villain and the book source has plenty of scenes with Sauron corrupting Saruman as well as destroying Denethor's mind using the Pilantir (not featured as a story line in the movie). He even had a brief mindfuck scene with Pippin but the movie did very little to convey his treachery.

The Hobbit movies were a money grab as soon as the studio realized that the fall out from Del Toro's exit was going to cost them more money. Two movies would have been enough and all of the filler drama added in could have been left out.

reply

Yeah, well the whole thing with Merry, Eowyn, and the Witch King was one of those things bound to work better on the page than when filmed.
Because in a book you can *say* that Merry is fooled by Dernhelm, but you can't fool a movie viewer by by shoving hair under a helmet, so the whole dramatic identity reveal thing had to be dropped. Without that, all you have left is a short confrontation.

Also, they cast such a fragile little thing as Eowyn that you can't believe she could lift that sword, much less kill something with it. The Eowyn of the book was described as a tall strong sheildmaiden, eager to ride out a kick ass, and able to pass as a young man.

reply

That was terrible, and it only gets worse each time I rewatch this trilogy.

Sauron has yet to reveal his deadliest servant, yet Angmar was present in all three films, and there were many witnesses each time, did he even kill a single person other than the poor Frey Gatekeeper at Bree, those Gondorian soldiers on the wall of Minas Tirith, and poor King Theoden?

Then when the Riders of Rohan show up in this film, Angmar disappears never to be seen again until well after Rohan plowed over a hundred thousand Orcs, then he has a terrible battle scene with Eowyn, gets stabbed by Merry and just stands there on his knees while she drives a sword into his face, good grief.

reply

Angmar was a city, not a person. The leader of the nine is the Witch-King.

reply

Yeah I know, was just writing Angmar as short form for Witch-King of Angmar.

reply