The Return of the King

Welcome to Ink Stained Fingers, the one true home for book lovers everywhere.

As most anyone knows that's even arrived at my blog by chance or accident, the last time I reviewed a book was a while back and I hadn't even finished the series yet like I promised. Well, it's time to make good on my geeky promise to move to the last book in The Lord of the Rings series known as The Return of the King. For those of you looking forward to a review of The Hobbit, fear not. I will come back and review that book just before the movie appears in local theaters to prepare for what should be an epic movie.

However, before I get started on my geeky quest I have finally called my friend, long lost sister, and geek in arms to help me review our first book together. I've spent a few reviews on her blog reviewing old and bad movies. But today she's here to be my geek in arms for this review. Welcome my dear friend The Cinema Chick.

Yes, you caught me on one of the days I'm not drugged up and I'm ready to discuss my (personal) least favorite in the Lord of the Rings Trilogy.  I have my reasons for this, but I'm not at all denying that it's a fantastic ending to an epic trilogy.  So, since I'm a guest on this lovely blog, I'll do what I'm told.  Let's get started, shall we?

Truth be told I had to re-read this book before I jumped into a new review. I knew the basic layout of the story but I didn't want to base my review on the movie version since it is so much different than the book itself.  While things are shifted around in the timeline or edited for the sake of the movie there really wasn't that much actual change done from the book to the movie that harmed the telling of the story in any way.

That being said the book itself does give a lot of information missing from the movie's story line that just fills in some gaps. So if you're a big enough geek like us then reading the book for these extra bits might be worth the effort.

Plus, the book is always better.  Those of you who have only seen the film, bet you don't know why Eowyn and Faramir are standing together at Aragorn's coronation  Or why Sam picks up that little girl after Frodo leaves Middle Earth.  And how many of you know what REALLY happened to Saruman and Grima?  See, these things were left out of the film, but I found them to incredibly important and interesting.  There is just one thing I'd like to get off my chest about the films.

Well, you ARE a movie reviewer at heart my friend so go right ahead.

Arwen is made out to be this romantic heroine but if you've read the book, she's barely present.  She's not that important to the overall plot.  For some reason, Peter Jackson decided we all needed more Arwen, but really, Eowyn is the show stopper.  She took care of her uncle when he was cursed, she secretly fought at the Battle of Pelennor and she killed the Witchking of Angmar.  What did Arwen do?  Not a damn thing.  I know some people out there are going to hate me for not liking her, but I cannot stand Arwen.

These are great points and you are completely right. You see the movie and Arwen has this big role with all of her scenes despite the fact she does little to contribute to the overall ending of the movie. Eowyn is the ultimate female hero in this last book. Unlike Bella of Twilight, when Aragorn doesn't return her affections, when he doesn't heed her advice, and when he ditches her; she does have a time of sadness. But once it's time for the ultimate battle and Merry is told to stand back with her, she takes a stand, hides in the armor of a man and takes the young hobbit Merry into battle with her. 

Heck, even Pippin does more in the book than he actually does in the movie as well. He shows a level of bravery and facing the unknown with an ease that would be hard for others to comprehend despite being separated from his dear friend.

I freaking love Pippin.  He doesn't get enough credit.  True, he starts off insecure and immature, but look at what he does.  He inspires the Ents to go to war.  He fights with the Men in Gondor.  I will admit, one of my favorite scenes from the movie is where Pippin sings to Denethor and scenes from the battle are spliced in.

Everyone has some great changes in their characters throughout the series. They live, learn and grow in ways they wouldn't have if this all had never happened. To this end, I could agree with you Cinema Chick. I don't like Arwen either. She never changes. Never grows. And never becomes something more than a pretty face and a queen to Aragorn's king. Love makes one do crazy things sometimes.

Speaking of Aragorn, in this final book you can really see his transformation sooner than one might think it happens because they only saw the movie. There is a scene in the book where Aragorn is traveling back with the King of Rohan and his army when they are met by a group from Dunedain. It is this point where, in his talks with his kin as he calls them, that he begins to see that his path lies in another way and he has a great duty set upon him to become King. This only happens in the movie when Elrond shows up at the camp the night before they ride to battle to bring the reforged sword and send him on The Paths of the Dead. That moment with Elrond NEVER happens in the book.

Come to think of it, Elrond isn't a huge presence in the book either.  He's huge in the first book when they get to Rivendell and again when the war is over, but he is all over the place here.  By the way, did you know he has twin sons, Elladan and Elrohir?  Yeah, Arwen isn't his only child.  He's got a wife to, Celebrian, the sister of Celeborn.  I know some changes have to be made from page to screen, but I think the sons could have been worked in since they were more important to the plot than Arwen.  So may characters were left out, which bothers me.

And here's a kicker, if the meeting with the group from Dunedain had been added to the movie we would have actually seen Elladan and Elrohir. It was they who joined with Aragorn's kinsman and were carrying the reforged sword from Rivendell to him so that he could depart and head for The Paths of the Dead. Personally, I think it would have been better that way myself.

Well, the only thing that got to me was how confused and muddled the story became.  I'm all for telling 2 stories, but they would change every chapter and I just got sick of having to sort everything out.  One minute we'll be with Merry and Eowyn, then we're with Pippin and Gandalf, then over to Frodo and Sam.  I just hated that.  They wanted to tell everyone's story, I get it, but did it have to be told like that?

Yes, the book did have that one downside. It wasn't fluid. It wasn't easy to follow unless you really paid close attention and were able to recall things you've all ready read. I had a hard time trying to keep everything sorted out. That's the place the movie got it right in being able to make it easier to understand which is why I don't mind so much in the changes that were made.

Needless to say, the book was the basis for all the great scenes, speeches, and characters that the movie was able to bring to life. The writing for the book really gave you the picture in your mind to hold onto while you were being carried through the story. Despite being jerked from one story to the other, the stories themselves were detailed, thought out, and they all had a serious purpose to the story itself.

Then it just got repetitive.  We get it, the journey's getting too hard, it seems like a great time to give up, blah blah blah  Frodo's whining, Aragorn's questioning himself, Merry and Pippin want to go home.  Yes, everyone gets scared, but this goes on and on. Think about it, Aragorn spends the entire book refusing to take the throne then finally, at the end he decides he'll be king.  Frodo does nothing but whine the entire time, so when he gets in the fight with Gollum, I'll admit, I was hoping Gollum would win.

Sam carried some serious weight in the book. Again, I see Sam as another character that was seriously underrated. He stuck by Frodo though EVERYTHING they encountered. Even when he thought his friend had died he knew that the ring still had to be carried on and took the ring. But the second he knew Frodo wasn't dead he pulled on his big boy pants and went in there ready to get Frodo back even if it meant fighting of orcs by himself.

And at least you can take solace in the fact that Gollum at least gives Frodo a reason to complain when he bites his finger off. I personally got a laugh at the end when they make a song about Frodo of the four fingers.

Ok, here's the one huge thing that pissed me off in the adaptation.  The story does not end when the Hobbits return home.  In the book, Saruman has taken over Hobbiton and they have to defeat him in order to get their lives back.  That was one of the best parts of the whoe story because it showed the bravery of the Hobbits.

Yes, that's a HUGE missing plot point in the story. Their world has literally been turned upside down and after this huge ordeal of destroying the the one ring, all Sam, Merry, Pippin, and Frodo have to rely on is each other. It is those four who manage to draw out the other courageous hobbits and get them to fight to take control of the Shire and make it a peaceful and beautiful place.

Once that final battle is complete, only then can they return to the simple comfortable life of living in the Shire while trying to deal with the aftermath of emotions that swarms them. This makes it hard for all of them to simply relax. They are now separate from their own kind simply because they have grown in the way the rest of their kin haven't. They've experienced the world. True the other hobbits experienced battle too but not in the same way these four did. It took the knowledge, strength, courage, and yes even age to give them the ability to fight and win back their home.

So let's face it, Return of the King is a great, albeit confusing story about courage, strength and defeating evil.  It's condensed in the film and a good portion of it is missing, but the overall theme is still there.  The film snob in me says it deserved all 17 Oscars it won, but the book nerd in me wishes Peter Jackson hadn't taken such liberal artistic license with the films.  I love that Sam's daughter is named Elanor and that he becomes mayor.  I especially love what happens with Gimli and Legolas, who just vanish in the film.  

You see, the book tells you what happens to these characters.  Yes, Aragorn dies and Arwen dies a year later.  The Hobbits live to be old men, except for Frodo who is allowed to travel to the Grey Havens. My absolute favorite ending is that Legolas and Gimli build a boat together and later in his life, they sail said boat to the Grey Havens TOGETHER.  Those two changed the relationship between Elves and Dwarves but it's so skimmed over, you'd never know it.

Exactly. Relationships that had be estranged for long periods of time before this adventure were now long lasting friendships and alliances. While I'm not a fan of books that have the "happily ever after" ending, The Return of the King isn't just a story in and of itself. It has to be taken in the whole with everything else before it. This "happily ever after" wasn't just a given. It was fought for tooth and nail. Kings and men and women of all races died to ensure the survival of future generations at the expense of their own. It is that effort that made a "happily ever after" that was earned and one of the few, I think, is deserved for the trials and tribulations.

 And this children, is why you should be reading Tolkien and not Stephanie Meyer.

On this point, I will most certainly agree. If you want a love story go read something else. But if you want a story full of adventure, colorful characters, meaningful pursuits, epic battles, and much more, you can't go wrong with reading some Tolkien. He knows what it means to weave a tale worthy of the price and to create a world that makes you miss it and the characters once you've closed the book. A connection. The same can be said of the Harry Potter series but that's a whole different ball game all together.

To end this three part review, I would actually like to say our impressions of the series as a whole. Is the series something that will stand the test of time and be something that anyone could read and still feel the same passion and excitement that everyone felt when it first came out or is this just something that was exciting for now but later something better will come along that will completely eclipse this work.

What do you think Cinema Chick? 

The Lord of the Rings trilogy is a can't miss.  It teaches great lessons, is loosely based on Christianity and so many of today's books have been inspired from Tolkien's work.  Some people won't like it because it is long and sometimes it drags, but once you've read the entire thing, it's almost rewarding.  The movies are great, but for the full impact, read the books.  The book is always better.

I have to agree. This series paved the way for many of the great books and movies that have all ready come out and I'm sure the ones that are still to come. It has set the standard for the epic saga that the likes of series like Harry Potter have now found a foothold in the book lover and movie goer's psyche. (Do NOT say the Twilight Saga to me. That doesn't count). I see this series lasting for years to come and I hope in the future that I could share these books with another child to pass on the stories so no one will forget what Tolkien managed to create.

I think that about does it for The Return of the King book review as well as the Lord of the Rings Saga. What say you Cinema Chick any last words to the people?

I'm TheCinemaChick, I'm minty fresh and always remember, the true meaning of what a Q-tip is used for is a mystery.

And I'm Creative Karma, what karmic lesson will I teach next time? Keep a sharp eye out and tuned in. You never know, the next book I might review might be your favorite read.