Login | Register
 
Message Board | Latest Posts | Your Recent Posts | Rules

Thread: Most Annoying Scenes?

Is this discussion interesting? Share it on Twitter!

Bottom of Page    Message Board > The Two Towers > Most Annoying Scenes?   
Well I am watching the Master Trilogy of LOTR all the way through for the 7th time. I bought the uber special collectors bundle on DVD, with a box that holds three box sized dvd cases with two discs per movie with extras. But i just got through all the extras, and am watching the trilogy for the first time with the knowledge of the hours of extra footage. Anyways, I like the two towers because there isn't that much time with Frodo. You probably don't know me, but i am a big hater of the elijah frodo and the astin sam. I loved them in the book but there is seriously something wrong with elijah and astin was cool in goonies but thats it. Anyways, I know i need to vent about stupid things put in movies, so i thought I would ask, what part(s) of the LOTR's most annoyed you and why? For me, there are many, but I just happen to watched a set of scenes that I just think is stupid. Just after Farimyer decides to give his king the ring, Sam lies to Farimyer about Boromir dying because he broke an oath that never happened. Which is part of this next scene, and from what I understand, they keep adding these couple of scenes to try and change Farimyers mind about the ring. Obviously Farimyer is a noble man, and would make the right choice with out all the lying and scare tactics, as long as they would just tell him the truth. So the scene i hate is right after sam lies, and a part of a buliding goes down. The shot goes to froto who has this really disturbed look in his face and that ring noise starts up. Then froto puts his big bug eyes up and his face down, and says there here, they come. I mainly think its dumb, cause obviously they know they could be attacked at any moment, but its dumb that the creature doesn't make any sounds until Frodo says something. With an army at his side, they all scramble like rookies and leave the hobbit with the ring of power unguarded? But if I knew the power of that ring, I would of at least had several guards stay with him to protect the ring from the enemys, especially when the servant of Saron just showed up? When the story gets back to Frodo, he starts walking out into the fight, and the idiot sam just says "uh What you doing, where you going", when he clearly should of grabbed him and kept him there! As frodo is walking out into the open, you see a dozen of Faramir's men just standing there ducking there heads, when they could of been guarding the ring or attcking the creature? I mean it was just one creature, and there whole army panics?! It isn't until Frodo goes up stair(in a blink of an eye) and hands out the ring to the servant, that Faramir notices whats going on! And then Sam gets his head out his As$ and goes and pulls him down! What tops it off, is that a whole army is sitting there trying to hide, when all it took was one arrow from Faramir and the creature n the servent fly away?!? Once the arrow is shot, it seems like everything around frodo and sam just goes away so that sam and frodo can have their "love" scene. And what it takes for Faramir to change his mind is sams "speech" which he was just lying to try and trick Faramir again Smile Smilie cuz he knew he was standing there. And all of a sudden there are like 20 army guys behind frodo n sam?! I am not a professional screenwrite/actor, but these scenes are just ridculous! I mean i could of written something better for those scenes. But it was sams lying and bs speech to let them contiune the trek. I just feel that this whole string of scenes felt way to orchestrated and didn't flow like I remember it in the book. Out of all the scenes in the Two Towers, it was just a mess and would only entertain a kid.
One of the main points of this scene is to show the effect that the Nazgűl have on ordinary men - they cower and they flee in terror. It would be next to impossible to keep control of your men in such a situation, and it would be easy to forget about two small hobbits (remember, the majority of Faramir's men do not know what Frodo carries) in the midst of an attack like that. Frodo senses the Nazgűl before anyone else does because of the Ring - it is slowly taking control of him, and the Nazgűl are drawn to its power. This is also why he offers the Ring to one of them; it's the Ring controlling him. Think of the situation Sam is in. He's a hobbit, a gardener, and has been flung into a world of terror and evil that he should never had seen. The reason he did nothing until the last moment was probably because he was too scared. I have no problems with this scene. It displays several themes and characters well, in my opinion.

I cannot say that I feel any scene was the most annoying, but there is a scene that got on my nerves a little , but simply because the time it took was at odds with the terrible need to move on. I am referring to King Theoden when he announced they would at last fight . Gamling is rushing about getting his master's war gear together and Theoden is waxing poetic about what things have come to while Gamling, I don't even recall if that is his name, is so anxious for his King to just get on with things. It was beautifully done with the sunlight streaming upon them, but somehow it really got on my nerves.

Well I did point out a lot of obvious stuff with out giving a solid reason for it being annoying. I just thought the movie was flowing through real well, then those scenes just kind of put a hault to the flow.

It might of been cause they were cutting from one event to the other and so many things were going on.

I think what annoyed me the most was just Elijah's acting, so i bitcted about the whole scene. 

I thought the rest of the movie worked out perfectly. I just didn't like that set of scenes even though they all had motives that i was to hot headed to see.

This scene annoyed me also, though not nearly as much as the broken staff scene.  This is an example of PJ doing his own thing while the audience wonders where the plotline from the book has gone.  There were constant references and scenes before this point which clearly showed the power of the Ring and its effect on Frodo.  PJ didn't need this one.  There was no reason to have Faramir take Frodo to Osgiliath.  Nor was there any reason to show Frodo in direct confrontation with a Ringwraith.  As I've said elsewhere, that confrontation should have logically been the end of the movie.  Game over.  Sauron wins.  It's not logical with what Tolkien gave us, and it should not have been done that way on screen.  But PJ knows best.  It makes me worried for the new Hobbit movies.

Elijah's and Sean's acting was not as bad as you think.  They were trying to convey dramatically very old-fashioned themes and relationships which Tolkien embedded in his work.  This is very hard to do, especially when the actors are not that old and have not done Shakespeare.  They do not have the experience to carry off the scene without making it look "stupid" by modern viewers.  Yet if you understand the reasons behind these scenes, you'd see the acting was an attempt to get at what the characters really felt and acted.  The acting didn't bother me.  It was rather PJ's constant changing of necessary scenes from the books that irked me.

Gandalf

Ive said in other places, my dislike for there acting is probably because they are shadowed by the greats(Christopher Lee, Ian McKellen, Sean Bean, Ian Holm, Karl Urban, Hugo Weaving and Viggo) 

Its like these characters the above greats played, that didn't need to much to be good, but they made you believe they are those people and did a super awesome job recreating those character's lifes n emotions.

With Frodo, his character is the one who has to play out the most intricate emotions that have to tell you whats going on by the look in his face. Like you should be able to tell if the ring is hurting him, draining him or telling him what to do. But you can never really tell by his face, only by his actions.


Same goes to Sam, but a lot of their scenes I feel that they could of done a better job. Like Elijah always seems to have the same faces for different emotions. 

From what i watched in the extras, it seems that they filmed long hours, in remote places and the hobbits started a couple of months before everyone else. So the drain on Sam n Frodo might of dulled there acting just a little. But its probably not there fault entirely PJ probably told them to cry, get mad or to make certain faces.

For me, it was far more annoying that the writers had Faramir take the hobbits to Osgiliath at all, because he needed to show that he "grew" while he was in the film, then that specific scene.

The staff-breaking scene is stupid, but the scene on the stairs of Cirith Ungol, I think, takes the title of "most worthless scene added for dramatic effect."

I also hate those darn ghosts that can cut people and fly onto Mumakil.

I agree with Turin in regards to Faramir taking the Hobbits back to Osgiliath. That scene, in my opinion, completely deviated away from Faramir's true character. In the books, he was not a mini-Boromir; he was a noble man - much more so than his deceased brother. This scene made Faramir look like all the other "weak-minded Men" that Lord Elrond spoke of when he was supposed to stand out as the one man who was unaffected by the Ring's power. I do not understand why PJ refused to acknowledge that. 

If you watch the making of the movies, you'll see that they wanted to show Faramir grow on his "journey."

They also thought that it would take away from the draw of the ring they were trying to depict if they showed a character who wasn't tempted by it.

 

Keep in mind these are the same people who thought pipe weed is marijuana.

Well, I've played game The Hobbit on ZX Spectrum and red LotR some 25 years ago, so you could say I go way back with Tolkien's world. (Game wasn't so good. blush)

Osgiliath Hobbit-Nazgul fight scene put aside, I liked movie scenes with Denethor and his sons, because they added some everyday time in their lives. I've always felt these three could be more explained in the book, because I didn't quite understand Denethor's feelings towards Faramir.

I guess that sub-plot (although a tiny one) didn't appeal to Tolkien.

Turin,

 I own the extended editions and I found that bit where they were talking about that. While it is a noble idea, I do not fully understand why they felt the need to take that out of the story - the part where Faramir was not tempted by the Ring. I would think that it would not  "take anything away from the draw of the Ring", but show that not all people are tempted by its power - that some are so pure in heart that they do not see nor feel the dark summons of the One Ring. But hey...what is done is done. Good movie rendition...

 

...And people seriously think that?! About pipe-weed being marijuana, that is.      Why?? The Hobbits do not appear to get "high" off of it....

I honestly don't know where the movie creators got the idea that Tolkien could've possibly meant that pipe weed was anything other than tobacco. And you're right that in the books the Hobbits don't get high off of it at all, but in the movies...well the scene at Orthanc comes to mind.

I agree with your point on Faramir. I think some critics believe that if a character is portrayed as too "good" then it is a sign of a lack of depth. Maybe they don't know that some people are just awesome.

I dont think anyone depicted that pipe weed was Pot in the film.  Other than Saruman telling Gandalf that "The Hobbits Leaf has slowed your mind"   After the destruction of orthanc the Hobbits found food, weed and ale.  I thought of Merry and Pippin as drunk and high on the field of victory.

Billy Boyd (Pippin) in the documentaries, says..."So were we smoking pipe weed...whatever pipe weed is...whatever Tolkien was on about......so the question is, how drunk are we...how high are we ?"...he is clearly implying pipe weed may be Marijuana...as you say, this is is completely wrong...Tolkien says it is a variety of "Nicotiana"..i think it was...clearly tobacco,,,,

Please Alana, Ive seen that too and he was joking around.  In the book Gimli comments on the rather Jolly state that Merri and Pipp are in.

oh, ok..point taken, Brego..I guess i took that interview a bit too seriously...haha....yes, the feeling I got from the book was that they'd had a spot of ale.....lol....

Yes Alana true.  I find that scene in the film (a wonderful re introduction to the partially re united Fellowship) heart warming and wonderful.  I love the expression Gimli has on his face when he exclaims "Drinking and Smoking! You little rascals!"  or something like that... 

Yes, Brego...I love that scene...."the salted pork is particularly good......."....(ok , i know that wasn't in the book....)....& Pippin says..."i feel like I'm sitting in the The Green Dragon....drinking a pint of ale..after a hard day's work"...and Merry says.."only you've never done a hard day's work...."..haha....

Acually, have you ever thought of this....the way the story was structured in the film....Merry & pippin are out "scrumping" in Farmer Maggot's fields, one day...suddenly they are swept off on an adventure with Frodo & Sam...they never have time to return home or send a message; they have no mobiles...(sorrry, Cell phones if you are in the US).....what do their families think has become of them...their loved ones must be going frantic...they don't return for about a year, is it ?....the families must think they are dead?.....it didnt happen this way in the book....oh well, I guess i analyse too much..it's only a movie...lol...have you ever thought about this ?...

True Alana, (by the way Im in Australia, we have mobiles here...)  Yes there are some years between these events in the book.  Gosh would have been hard to film and take ages to tell.  I kind of get why PJ altered the time line.  It will be interesting to see how PJ handles this time diff in the Hobbit if he stretches out the story to show how and why Frodo ends up living at Bag End.  As they have cast someone to play his Dad perhaps we will get to see how and why Frodo is taken in by Bilbo.  This will be a sad tale as anyone who has read all of the stories will know...

Yes, indeed...the sad story of Mr Drogo Baggins & Miss Primula Brandybuck...perhaps we will finally get to find out...was it Drogo's weight that sank the boat...or did she push him in, and he pulled her in after him...?..haha....

I've always had a sneaking suspicion regarding how and why Frodo's parents drowned...  Its far too convenient a thing re the story.  Tolkien never uses convenience in his world, it must have been fate as fate would explain that Frodo had to receive the ring eventually to be able to destroy it.  I suppose you can look at it by many angles, I find it intriguing...

Yes, I have often thought about this, Brego....I think in some sense Frodo had to be an Orphan, in order to do what he had to do...or maybe it was necessary that he went to live with Bilbo?....we often wonder why bad things happen to us....I don't know...do you think there is a reason for  everything that happens ?

Among the many I actively dislike, the "hyena" scene in The Two Towers is probably the worst.

Do you mean the warg attack on the Rohirrim en route to Helm's Deep?

 

I actually like that scene, fight scenes are one of the few areas in which films are actually superior to books.

Just my two cents.

I too thought the Wargs looked rather Hyenaish. Im hoping that the Mountain Wargs are slightly more Wolfish.  Having said that I do like the actual scene, its very well constructed, even if its not in the book.

Its funny PJ seems to have used a lot of Neolithic creatures in the films.  There was a predator roaming around 10's of thousands of years ago called Hyenadon which is almost identical to the Wargs depicted in the movies.  Also the great beasts pulling Grond are similar to a Rhino type creature which actually existed,  Im sure however there were never Oliphants of such gigantic size or fell beasts.....
 

The one and only terrible legacy that Tolkien left society is his portraying smoking as alright. He himself seemed to wish to not believe it could be harmful. He seemed to be clearly dependent on smoking. I remember him writing one of the children i think and he mentions that the doctor has him on medication for 'catarrh' or something sick in the sinuses, clearly from his use of 'pipe weed'. Having lost three members of my family from smoking, never to see them again in this life, watching them die horrifying deaths, I am always upset at Pippin and Merry enjoying the weed and Gandalf, who should have been an example in taking care of his body, but what is , is. I will never ever believe that there is any justification to portray tobacco or illegal drugs as okay in society. I would have rather Tolkien just stated they smoked in a way that does not at all glamorize or make it cozy to do so. So, for me the scene of them smoking and by the way being tipsy, another no no for me as the world is groaning under the weight of alcoholism, is the most irritating scene.

Of course you are correct re tobacco and alcahol Leelee. I see it this way. The evils of substances were not known in our far distant past, as they are today. Tolkiens generation were only just recognising reasons for disease through new Education and technology. Also I'm sorry to hear that those close to you were touched by this.

Maybe not so much annoying, but makes me insane.  When the oliphants attack Osgiliath and King Theoden orders the suicide charge into them.  I know it’s more dramatic, but send half the Rohirrim around each flank and attack from behind.  So many brave men and horse needlessly sacrificed; puts my stomach in knots. 

Here here  Bingo, I most heartily agree. Surely the much seasoned Theoden knew a great deal about  strategy and attack. I felt ill as I watched all those dear warriors go to their untimely and unnecessary deaths. Oh and hullo Bingo. I am pleased to see your post.

And I am pleased to bow to your acquaintance, LeeLee of Rivendell.  Let us hope charges of that nature will not haunt us in the future. 

Yes let us hope. As Aragorn said in the movie we always have hope.

I've always had a sneaking suspicion regarding how and why Frodo's parents drowned...  Its far too convenient a thing re the story.  Tolkien never uses convenience in his world, it must have been fate as fate would explain that Frodo had to receive the ring eventually to be able to destroy it.  I suppose you can look at it by many angles, I find it intriguing...

Sorry for bringing up such an old thread, but this is exactly what I was thinking.

Maybe Frodo - as an orphan - had some kind of inner strength when it comes to dealing with loneliness. He knew how to deal with the responsibility, when there's no one to help him. Maybe he had nothing to loose, I mean - he had no close family left in the Shire when he decided to go on this journey. The Shire was his home, but not in a wider sense of the word.

True Indis and I still find it intriguing. I believe that in the future movies we may meet Frodo's parents and also Bilbo's in flash back. Well have to wait and see.

You mean in the third movie? It would be a proper place for those scenes. Nice transition to LOTR story.

Possibly the third film.  I think as well we may get to see Gandalf in Dolguldur, Baby Bilbo, Glorfindal defeating the Morgul Army and possibly more.

Lets hope.
I think in the third film we will see Bilbo meeting Aragorn in Rivendell.
I hope so Glorfinfal. One The One Ring.net in the cast section there is a young lad listed as co staring. He looks around 13 and looks like the boy who played Anarion in TTT. I thought when I saw it that he could be a young Aragorn. We may even see Aragorn's Mother, Gilraen together in Imladris

I think at the time Arwen was staying with Galadriel In Lorien. I don't think that she and Aragorn met until a few years later, when Aragorn was in his late 20's. interesting.

When it comes to most annoying scenes, for me its almost every scene Sam is in.

I'm with you Glorfindel. I don't want to say any scene with Sam in it, but any scene where Sam and Frodo had a moment. In the books I always felt they were the epitome of friendship. But in the movies it's almost like Sam is in love with Frodo and they are in some teen drama relationship where Frodo doesn't really care about Sam. The worst was the scene climbing the stairs. The addition of the stairs already annoyed me, and then the two get in some pointless emo argument and, after everything they went through to get there, Frodo just dismisses Sam's story and tells him to go home. Like he can just follow the yellow brick road or something. Not to mention he wouldn't need to eat more than one piece of lembas bread to be full, whereas Gollum emptied an entire little leaflet of them.

Ridiculous...

Hmm, almost every scene with Sam in it; plus from Balrogs:

In the books I always felt they were the epitome of friendship. But in the movies it's almost like Sam is in love with Frodo and they are in some teen drama relationship where Frodo doesn't really care about Sam.

Well at least these opinions concern minor characters Wink Smilie

The filmmakers actually defended the lembas (and so on) scene with:

'The reason Frodo turns Sam away is what would happen to that story if he didn't do something? You would have a very long climb up the stairs and then you would have Sam getting lost in the tunnel, which happens in the book, which is not dramatic (Jackson and Boyens).'

quoted from Bratman: Summa Jacksonica, Tolkien On Film

So in short, an illustration of 'the needs of film' argument.

Noting too, if obvious enough, that even doing 'something' here (that is, if it was all agreed upon that something about films versus books meant that something 'had' to be different here in the first place) need not have meant doing what the filmmakers actually did.

Still wish Sam had found the ring and had a mini adventure to save Frodo. Still would've been pretty dramatic...ooooooh well.

So I watched The Hobbit again last night. One thing that sort of bugs me is Thorin's personality. It fits to that of the book, a stern leader who's mind is set, but he still comes off as more....majestic than I'd imagined in the books. To me he was more of a leader trying to lead his people home. In the film he's more like a fallen dictator trying to regain power. Maybe not quite as cruel, but not as caring as I remember either. I wouldn't say it's terrible, and if you didn't know Tolkien it might actually be quite appealing, but it went against my original vision so it was a nagging thought.

Also the scene where the cave splits open and the group is captured by goblins....I don't know why they changed it so much. The way in the book would've taken just about the same amount of screen time and, IMO, would be just as dramatic than just falling through the floor (at a ridiculous height, nonetheless). A group of screeching goblins kidnapping the dwarves, who are then lead to the Goblin King, as Bilbo escapes. Instead of the "being ushered" scene after the fall it could've shown more of the Halls of the Goblin King. Again not the worst thing that could happen, but I don't fully understand why. At least they showed the cave being split open...

I think for me the most annoying scene of all is in TROTK special edition. It hurts me still. It's The Gandalf v Witchking scene. Ill say no more... Could have easily been wonderful. But alas. Awful and totally unessesary.

On annoying scenes in the hobbit:

I'm not going to start listing them but rather I want to say this, The fact that all the dwarves were armed during the entire movie tells me that PJ either missed the entire point and allure of the book or simply chose to ignore it in hopes of greater cash flow.

It really grinds my gears

Yes true Areth. In the book, from memory, the Dwarves were only lightly armed with wood axes and a bow. Seems strange that they'd go out on such a dangerous mission as such.

Now if I remember correctly they did lose most of their gear at one point, don't remember if that involved weapons. And keep in mind we're only 1 movie in. It's not at all unlikely they'll lose them at some point...

Or he'll just butcher the story. Guess we'll find out in December...

I think they lose their weapons soon after leaving The Shire when their ponies run away during Troll Shaw. I think.... I remember that after Beorn they had bows because they shoot at squirrels and deer....