Hacker News Reader

Comment by Apocryphon | Hacker News Reader

The Scouring of the Shire would've turned the theatrical cut into a 4 hour movie, and the extended cut into a 5 hour movie.

Perhaps it would've made ROTK the first dual-part series finale movie (like The Hobbit, Harry Potter, Twilight, The Hunger Games, Avengers) of its kind.

View on HN

Scouring was key for one of the things that concerned Tolkien the most: that even after the most virtuous war, there are losses and hurts that can't be mended.

And also, that the oppressed can come together and cast off their oppressors. I've always thought that was a secondary reason _Scouring_ was left out of the movie.

I remember being quite shocked when reading that part.

LotR is a book about hobbits. They start off protected by the rangers, grow and learn throughout the book, and finally use their experiences to liberate their homeland from Saruman.

So, one of the main points (the main point?) is missed, as well as Saruman's proper death.

You're not wrong, but ROTK has already been criticized for having multiple endings in the sense that the post-Battle of the Morannon parts drag on forever, and audiences were satisfied with the hobbits getting a happy ending without having to add an extended coda about Saruman calling himself "Sharkey" and the threat of sovietization coming to the Shire. It wouldn't have flowed well as a movie.

If ROTK had been made into a two-parter finale it could have worked, perhaps. Or maybe a separate spin-off film for the Scouring.

When you have that many layers, it takes a while to pop everything off the stack.

We went to see ROTK 12 hours before my wife was heading to the hospital to give birth. Her poor bladder almost didn't survive the numerous "is it over now?" endings.

Of all those movies LOTR was the only one with a reason to have a dual part finale.

Which is weird given that Return of the King is the shortest book (not counting the appendices).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com