TheLord of the Ringstrilogyhas gained wide acclaim, and rightfully so.The film trilogy bringsJ. R. R. Tolkien’s story to life, introducing Middle Earth to a new audience with all the intricacies that go along with it. Yet, there are several significant differences from the original books. Despite having made it to screens twice, once in the 1978 animated film and later inPeter Jackson’s trilogy, Tolkien never saw the story in theaters. Thus, his opinions on the adaptations are unknown. However, Tolkien had an idea of how it should be done. During the author’s lifetime,many attempted to adapt the epic fantasy, but Tolkien was highly critical of the one that got the furthest.
In 1958,Forrest J. Ackermangot Tolkien’s approval to try, but the treatment of the script he planned to use did not meet the author’s standards.In a letter published years later inThe Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien,Tolkien expressed his many thoughts on the treatment, holding little back.From this, it is easy to see his thoughts on how his story should be handled. Though Tolkien himself was interested in the adaptation, he claimed that, in the treatment he read, his story had “simply been murdered.” The author complained about everything from the shapes Gandalf’s fireworks took to the beaks and feathers added to the Orcs. Tolkien even claimed the conclusion “produces a confusion that mounts at last almost to a delirium.” Understandably, Tolkien was protective of his story, and many of his complaints were valid, but some of his minor issues reappear in the Peter Jackson adaptation, begging the question: would Tolkien approve of the beloved film trilogy?
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
A meek Hobbit from the Shire and eight companions set out on a journey to destroy the powerful One Ring and save Middle-earth from the Dark Lord Sauron.
What Did Tolkien Hate About the Attempted Lord of the Rings Adaptation?
In his later life, J. R. R. Tolkien was on board for an adaptation of his series. However, he was hesitant. One letter to Christopher and Faith Tolkien inThe Letters of J.R.R. Tolkienrecounts a meeting with Ackerman where Tolkien was pleased with the artwork for the proposed film. But he later received the story treatment byMorton Grady Zimmerman, which outlined the events as they were to happen in the script.Tolkien was less than satisfied with the adaptation and responded with a letter that even he considered lengthy, listing his concerns. Tolkien’s son, Christopher Tolkien, published pieces of the letter years later, but even the excepts show Tolkien’s thoughts clearly. Tolkien’s critiques were, at times, scathing, as he described how the outline treated his work “carelessly in general, in places recklessly, and with no evident signs of any appreciation of what it is all about.” He lists complaints about irrelevant magic, the way the Eagles were used, an unnecessary focus on fighting, and, most importantly, the misrepresentation of the heart of the story.
Some of Tolkien’s comments were simple changes that had little importance to the story. He notes that Gandalf’s fireworks take the form of hobbits and flags, to which he says, “I prefer my own choice of fireworks.” Other trivial changes include referring tolembasas a food concentrate, adding beaks and feathers tothe orcs, which Tolkien meant to be corruptions of the human form, and having the hobbits snack on “ridiculously long sandwiches.” Though perhaps not a drastic change to most, Tolkien was livid about Zimmerman’s descriptions of the Elven cities. Rivendell was described as a shimmering forest. Meanwhile, Lórien had a castle, of which Tolkien wrote, “I think this deplorable in itself, and in places impertinent. Will Z please pay my text some respect, at least in descriptions that are obviously central to the general tone and style of the book!” Though the depictions do not change the story significantly, Tolkien was passionate about them.
Other topics Tolkien brings up represent major issues about the potential adaptation, such as the additional use of the Eagles. The outline had an Eagle namedRadagast (which is the name of a wizard,not an Eagle) appearing in the Shire. The Eagles are already viewed as an issue within Tolkien’s world, raising many questions and making them more active in the story heightens that. Tolkien wrote, “The Eagles are a dangerous ‘machine’. I have used them sparingly, and that is the absolute limit of their credibility or usefulness.” Additional Eagles are not the only unnecessary change that Tolkien criticized. When the treatment had the Balrog speak, Tolkien complained that Zimmerman “may think that he knows more about Balrogs than I do, but he cannot expect me to agree with him.” Tolkien also expressed anger that theEntsreceived little explanation and that Tom Bombadil was misrepresented as a children’s fairytale character. This is one of the changes that Tolkien felt showed a critical misunderstanding of his writing. Another involves Saruman committing suicide rather than being killed. Tolkien insisted that Saruman would more likely “cling to life to its basest dregs,” claiming that ending his own life changes the character too much. But Tolkien saw these as issues that could be corrected, while other moments gave him little hope.
Tolkien Was Right to Criticize Some Changes to this Lord of the Rings Adaptation
Adaptations will always have changes, no matter how good they are, but this one significantly rewrote the end, essentially destroying the message of Tolkien’s story. Though the author doesn’t describe the plot points that inspired this statement, he wrote, “is totally unacceptable to me, as a whole and in detail.” This is a strong reaction, but with the context of the treatment, it is justified. Though Tolkien returned the treatment he read with his comments, it did not disappear and is now held at the J.R.R. Tolkien Collection at Marquette University in Milwaukee.This artifact shows that the end is entirely unrecognizable from Tolkien’s writings, justifying the author’s words.
The story has Sam abandoning Frodo to Shelob, knowing his friend is still alive, and taking the One Ring to Mount Doom himself, only for a crazed Frodo to attack him as he prepares to destroy the Ring. After the fight, Frodo awakens after Aragorn’s wedding and departs with the Elves. Not only is this a wholly unnecessary change, but it directly opposes Tolkien’s story of loyalty, friendship, and hope. This disregard for the Ringbearer’s story ruins everything Tolkien set into motion. Of course, the author disapproved, saying, “The Lord of the Ringscannot be garbled like that.” It could also explain some of the strong statements about earlier changes, as he had already determined not to like what the story was doing.
Would Tolkien Approve of Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings?
Yet even after this response, Tolkien hoped for an adaptation, just one closer to his original story. He hoped the detail and length of his response would show his interest in the concept, if not the execution. It’s interesting to see Tolkien’s grievances compared to the same moments in the completed films. While Peter Jackson’s trilogy does not dramatically change the ending, there are differences.The films focus on the fighting, but many of Tolkien’s issues do not appear, such as the overuse of the Eagles and the Orcs with feathers. Some of the changes followed Tolkien’s suggestions in the letter, though he still may not be thrilled with them.Neither Tom Bombadil nor Goldberry appear, which Tolkien suggested over a “meaningless appearance.” The films similarly resolve the author’s complaints aboutSaruman’s (Christopher Lee) death. While Jackson’s films do not have Saruman kill himself, as Zimmerman’s treatment did, Saruman’s proper death is cut, only appearing in theextended editions. Tolkien wrote in his letter that if his death from the book were to change, there is no good reason for him to die, which is how Saruman’s story ends in the theatrical release, so perhaps Tolkien would have accepted it.
However, some complaints in Tolkien’s letter could apply to Jackson’s films. Tolkien complained about the hobbits andAragorn (Viggo Mortensen)leaving Bree at night. He insists that the Ring Wraiths' ability to inspire fear is heightened in the dark, and Aragorn should know better. Perhaps Jackson’s adaptation escalates the danger enough to justify the immediate escape, but Tolkien would likely be unimpressed. Similarly, he would not appreciate Aragorn carrying a sword. Tolkien didn’t like that the character wielded a weapon as Strider, sincehis blade was famously broken. The films show him carrying a different sword, but the detail defies Tolkien. The author also complained of the Ring Wraiths and Balrog making sounds in Zimmerman’s treatment, which also occurs in Jackson’s films. The Ring Wraiths' screeches add a certain intensity, but it takes away from the soundless terror that Tolkien describes. Meanwhile, the approaching Balrog is heard through roars. Tolkien wrote in his letter, “The Balrog never speaks or makes any vocal sound at all.” Yet these noises are a minor change.
Another small gripe of Tolkien’s that appears in the films is the Battle of Helm’s Deep, which he suggests should be referred to as the defiance of the Homburg “since Helm’s Deep, the ravine behind, is not shown.” Yet the name has no lasting effect on the story, so perhaps the inaccuracy is forgivable. Tolkien may have disapproved of these adjustments, but the list is far shorter. In the end, Jackson’s trilogy doesn’t lose the heart of the story, nor does it turn Middle Earth into a fairytale world as Tolkien feared.They may not be perfectly accurate, but, if he saw them, even Tolkien would have to admit they tried.His epic series is not easy to adapt, and the author had high standards, but theLord of the Ringstrilogy captures Tolkien’s story despite the changes, making it as good an adaptation as could be hoped for. Tolkien was particular about his story, so it’s difficult to say if these films would have gained his approval, but they certainly won over his fans, and, in the end, that was their goal.
The Lord of the Ringstrilogy is available to stream on Max in the U.S.
