Why does Lord of the Rings have so many endings?
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 11. 2023
- Explore the best of fantasy and sci-fi in depth, with analysis of the worlds of Lord of the Rings, Game of Thrones, The Witcher and more.
For more Lord of the Rings content: • Video
Join me on Patreon - / indeepgeek
My channel for live content, including interviews and weekly livestreams - / @idglive
My audiobook channel: The Well Told Tale - / thewelltoldtale
Follow me on:
Twitter - @indeepgeek
Instagram - indeepgeekofficial
Facebook - / indeepgeek
TikTok - @indeepgeek
For merch, audiobooks, and all things In Deep Geek, explore my website - www.indeepgeek.com
Thank you to the talented artists who allowed their work to be featured in this video. You can find them and buy your own prints by following the links below:
Jerry Vanderstelt - store.vandersteltstudio.com/m...
Heraldo Mussolini - heraldo.mussolini
Dan Pilla - / danpillam
Miriam Ellis - www.miriamellis.com/
Matthew Stewart - www.matthew-stewart.com/
Anna Kulisz - www.kuliszu.art
Ralph Damiani - www.artstation.com/ralphdamiani
Aegeri: Lida Holubova - / gnome_z_lesa
This video was brought to you with support from my amazing Patreon community - special thanks to
Stephanie Frederick, Joshua Clark, Maura Lee, Rabbi Rob Thomas, Brooke Geer Person, Josh Bielemeier, Jane, Vance, Amy Southerland, Ivie Hilburn, Jimmy, Vercingetorix, Callie Summers, John-Paul DeLuca, Mario Murray, Filbert, Mike Hanna, Martin Sandberg, Edward Ryan, Stephanie B, Coleen, Ben Androvich, Nana L, Brennan Barnes, Ivanka Hainzl, Howland’s Little Sister, Charis Messalina de Valence, Donna Daley, Cade Norman, Murray D, NOscar, Rick Hoppe, Leathery Wings, James Pisano, Bridget Boyle, TheStarkInWinterfell, Ellemcee, Alannah Prestayn of Braavos, Raymond Joy, Jonathan Harrison, Petyr Pebble, Jason Mauleon Rosario, Milton Christopher Appling, Edward Ennett, Katy Smith, 26Artgirl, Karen Thomas, Rickon, Cathrine Furseth, James Fitzpatrick, Doug Hughes, lawnduck20, Perseffanie, Emily Mole, Lady Dane, The Late Escapist, Natalie Donald, J. Gregory Henderson, whalawitsa, Luna Cascade, Dan MacKay, Johnny Targs, Kevin Warner, Julie Bernard, Bear, Susan Lonergan, Bo Riley, Lyle Hammac, Taryn Giles, Alex Butter, Pam Peterson, Bettina Charlotte Nielsen, T boz, Angela Marie Young, Sarah Awesomesauce, Stephanie Erickson, KaliKo_Jack, SeaGreenMango, GeorgeRRTolkien, Antihero Association, Richard Woodard, Caiden Timmons, ThatVBGuy, Tyler Barnhart, Daiwai, John H. Austin, Jr, NikFromNJ, Ty Farnsworth, Beesman, EJ, Willow Button, Julia Kendall, Jonny Ceriani, Mary Frances Angelini, Emma Sheiman, Joseph Jones, Christine Denny, Julien Dubois, Leland, Max Kingdom, Tricia Brady, LiK, Simen Dalstein, Scott Maraldo, Shelley J, Karen Wennerlind, Nathan Drumm, Martin Sjöstrand, Kristen H, King of Imps, Minerva Gale, Eric Nelson, Michiel Venema, Kate, Stephen Smith. Brandie Roberts, Kendra Summers, reed m, Samuel Sabo, Zac Nadeau, Commander Ray, Mayra Lawson, Catalina Suazo, Lola Roebuck, Mark P, Nicole Stewart, Norse Sultan, Rasler, Steven Spaulding, Your Last Great kNight, Patrick Ward, Amy vh Hines, Slippery1989, Una Haller, Almo71, Ravi Kakarala, nemo sum, Jacob Culp, Janet Lyn, NikFromNJ, Magepie, Ms. Fox, Jon Greenwood, Jahan and Justice
Affiliate Links - (buying books from our Bookshop.org shop supports this channel and local bookshops at no extra cost to you.)
Books for fans of Lord of the Rings:
uk.bookshop.org/lists/lord-of...
Other books we love:
uk.bookshop.org/shop/indeepgeek
Thanks for watching!
(All pictures used are in the public domain, or used under fair use copyright laws or with the express permission of the artist). - Zábava
Tolkien's storys never end too late, nor do they have too many endings. They end exactly when they are finished.
Precisely.
And some don't end at all!
Too soon? Nah 😂
By the time the ring is destroyed the story is no longer simply Frodo's. It's the story of Frodo, Sam, Gandalf, and Aragorn. Gandalf's story ends when Sauron is defeated. Aragon's story ends when he becomes king and marries Arwen. Frido's ends when he sets sail. Sam's ends when he returns home. Simple.
Gandalf doesn't end with sauron defeated, he goes to Tom bombadil for 2 years and then sails to arda with frodo and bilbo, Aragorn has many deeds to do as king and ends his life at the age of 200 odd. Sam's continues in bag end. Logolas and gigli find the glittering caves and travels to fangorn again. Your analysis is shabby and really wrong
@@rodneyquinn2528 logolas and gigli lmao
@TJDious Bloody good breakdown into the most core elements there 👌
@rodneyquinn2528 I'd still argue the dude got it pretty well broken down in the why Tolkien might have seen fit to see through the eyes of each where he chose to. Not like it was the only time or the literal end of their days, just the story that was being presented to us.
Frido's story ends on the boat where his brother ordered his execution for going against the family
I like the final part with Frodo in the Shire as well, because it shows consequences. Frodo doesn't get to return home. He's scarred by his burden, and he can't really go back. Sam can. Evil may be defeated, but there is a price. That final, and first, confrontation between Saruman and Frodo is priceless.
Modern people dont believe in consequence.
@@kreuzrittergottes9336 Then they will suffer the consequences of their actions, and it will be worse because because they will not be expecting what is coming their way.
@Ykreuzrittergottes9336 Yes they do, where does this idea that people don't understand this come from?
no, they dont. they blame spoons for making them fat, guns for killing people, and the rich people for making them poor. shall i go on?@@thomasmain5986
@@beaverones41 it’s cringe boomer talk
Having too many endings is better than having no ending at all (Game of Thrones)
That ending is a complete joke. I always felt like Game of thrones lacked an overarching plot. Things are just happening. To me its like a bunch of character studies in one. I dont have the same feeling of, these things need to happen for character- and subplots to continue and conclude. Its different when I look at the fellowship and can already guess what will happen. Maybe because its in movie format but lotr feels more like classic storytelling. Maybe the books are different I dont know.
The Scouring of the Shire showed that despite the Shire being so far from the main battles, it too suffered during the War of the Ring. It also demonstrated part of how the 4 Hobbits had changed during their journey; the sheltered Hobbits who remained in the Shire were not up to the challenge of dealing with Sharkey's takeover but when the 4 returned they were more than up to the challenge.
I've never understood the complaint about there being too many endings. There were many story lines to be wrapped up and it took a while to bring all the characters to a proper point for the next phase of their respective lives.
The complaint of "Too many endings" definitely comes from the movies. In the movies, the last one seems rushed and sets up these abrupt false endings, then skips the Scouring of the Shire (Denouement) which gives us the real closure for the story. The movies miss out on how the Hobbits took the lessons of their grand adventure, then incorporated those lessons locally. It breaks the symmetry by not having it.
The last half hour of the movie is scene after scene of bittersweet endings and farewells, with very little (if any) variation in tone or mood. The lack of anything (like, say, discovering a minor villain had conquered the Shire while everyone was off fighting the Big Bad) to mix things up means the audience is left in a state of "the credits are about to roll any minute" for thirty minutes. That's where the "ending fatigue" comes from.
That complaint only comes from the movie watchers; it starts in the Shire with Bag End and ends in the Shire with Bag End. I like that the story starts humble with hobbits living close to real world and ends with the Sam greeting his family. That to me connects the story with real life easier because the story ends with all of the high fantasy stuff removed and you are left with a scene most people can resonant with.
In the DVD commentary Peter Jackson speculated that most of the complaints were probably bladder related. LMAO
When watching _Fellowship of the Ring_ we couldn't see where it would end, and it just seemed to drag on and on. The person in front of me got on his phone and said, "It's _finally_ over!" which was my feeling.
I never understood the complaint of too many endings. But then again, I don’t understand why so many otherwise intelligent people pass over LOTR as just another D&D story. Or that Tolkien broke the rules with his book structure.
If you are a person who likes to color inside the lines then maybe a single ending would have been more than sufficient. For the rest of us, the actual ending was worth waiting for if for no other reason than we were grieving that the fellowship was over and there would be no more endings.
Yup. That was Tolkien's whole point.
I think some of it is people forget that Frodo [and Sam for the most part] was the main character, yes there are endings to the other characters' parts, but in the end they were just very well written side characters who whose stories by happenstance good tangled with Frodo's story.@@kimhaas7586
Well it’s perfect - There and back again, by Bilbo baggins.
Sam says “I’m back” - and continues the red book…
Came here to say just that! You can’t have a story called, “There and Back Again” (‘A Hobbit’s Tale’ added in the movie I believe), without a Hobbit wrapping it all up by literally saying, “I’m back.”
It’s perfect, as you said.
Please never stop making Tolkien Videos! Always an enriching highlight of my week!
I don't know how many times I've read Lord of the rings over the years (I'm 70) but still this channel brings something new to reflect on.
I just want to say that, to me, there are even more endings. Thanks to the good Professor who told us what happened to the characters ever after.
I'm just a few years behind you, and I can say the same thing :)
And with every re-reading -- for more than 50 years -- I also find myself teary-eyed when I reach the end of the Tale of Years (Appendix B) when Sam, last of the ringbearers, departs for the havens.
@@jggimi Indeed! It never gets old 🙂
Ok but I can't bear people who hyper-pronounce everything like the person who does these videos.
@@john.premose What??? It sounds like proper English to me.
Literally "You now to no one" maybe my favorite cinematic scene ever. Viggos delivery is so damn good and the weight of it all omg. Jackson absolutely nailed this scene
If audiences unfamiliar with the book thought the film of Return of the King had too many endings, they’d be floored by the Scouring of The Shire.
But from a screenwriting and editorial perspective, if Shelob’s Lair was the climax of The Two Towers, then this could have happened as a final test of the Hobbits’ will and resolve, and seeing them restore The Shire to its former glory. That is the real thematic climax, seeing evil brought home in a petty mimicry of Mordor and seeing that dismantled by the four main heroes.
I felt that Shelob's Lair was the point that we shift perspectives from Frodo as the protagonist to Sam. Frodo had made decisions earlier, like when he encountered Faramir's band. But now he's caught up in events and can only go on with the weight of the Ring, letting Sam make the decisions.
It was one of Jackson's greatest failures...and they are legion...to not include the Scouring of the Shire. He simply didn't understand the point, because he didn't understand Tolkien at all.
To be fair, you have to make cuts somewhere whem making a movie. The Scouring done right could have been a whole movie on its own.@@timber72
@@timber72There was a big reason to not include it - from a film-only perspective this would make RotK even longer or would force more cuts from the main story, but more importantly you have only little connection to it in the movies as well. Saruman is out due to Ents (as well as Grima) and the main plot ends with Saruman defeated and Aragorn´s coronation.
It is a huge deed to see all "happy endings" and then cut suddenly to Shire, (re)new(ed) villain, stress and darkness again and it has basically no connection to what happens in last 9 hours of movies (theatrical length). It would call out many question marks and not for good.
Books are different. You see there hints, subtleties, have time to actually relate more. And even then on a first read you probably go and ask yourself "does the evil never ends? Wasn´t Sauron defeated? What is happening here, and why now?" and those feelings are unsettling a bit. Only on (re)reading you have time to see it as "a final act for our heroes to prove themselves, to close that on their own".
There is no way of putting that into an already long movie. Because if someone forced it in, it would end up weird on 99%. Why? That part has it´s own local villans, mainly Sackville Bagginses family. And their son Lotto. It all is about local politics and power shifts. And the "local theatre". You would need time to establish these characters, their motivations and their background for viewer to care about. And the time was not there.
___________
What could work much better is a standalone miniseries (4-8 parts) "The Shire", where you would have time. You could start on Bilbo´s leave, Frodo´s desires to leave somewhere "but maybe not yet", those parts of the first book. And then Gandalfs visit, revelation of the Ring and the reason to sell the Bag End.
You would have time to include farmer Maggot and his encounter with Nazgul, you could have included the fifth hobbit emulating Frodo living on the edge of Shire and sacking of that house by Wraiths. Based on/related to these things a raise in power for Lotto Baggins would seem natural if he´d promise to end these ill things. Only for him to turn out more and more wrong to a point his own old mother would go confronting him and end up in jail. You could have silent resistance, subplots with Rosie´s father and other hobbits, a similarities to real world boy-scouts actions. There were even coups happening there (or attempts).
Situation were grim but hobbits wanted to do something, but were lacking leaders. And then Sharkan comes in and all it even worse. But as a light at the end of a tunnel, our four heroes come in and are getting strange and unsettling news from Bree onwards. Then the gated bridge over Brandywine. And some swift ride through the Shire with shireguards. And the change of perspective to show how petty in the big world these problems are, yet absolutely more important for lives of common folk here. And then skirmishes and battles of hobbits throughout the Shire, with final assault on Bag End and the true death of Saruman (and Grima).
I would definitely watched it. But I am glad in the end it wasn´t in the movies.
@@timber72 And yet, he still brought Middle-earth to people who were too young to have read the books or not had the chance. There has never been a perfect filmmaking team to adapt Middle-earth. Rankin/Bass made a fun, stylised film of The Hobbit but not so much for Return of the King. Ralph Bakshi put a noble effort, but was hampered by a rough production. Still, all of these filmmakers have had their positive role to play.
The ending with Sam is the most humble and relatable. We can all relate to getting home after our long day and feel that love of hearth and home. Yes we cheer on the rest of the story and all our heroes, but it is all grand with wizards and villains and magic. While it is very adventurous, it is fictitious, while Sam being our down to middle earth gardener who passed up being Samwise the Strong to be our humble hero is the most relatable to us all. I think Tolkien brings us in and warms us with that kind of ending because he understands that great stories matter, but it is no bad thing to live a simple life.
Correct, you summed it up nicely.
I'd rather have many happy endings than a single bad ending.
When I read these three volumes over 50 years ago, it didn't occur to me that the story might have ended sooner, it just carried on and told me what happened to all the characters after the struggle was over. The fate of Saruman was dealt with badly in the films, but the book lets us know the small end that he came to on the doorstep of Bagend. And so it really does let us know that in the end, as Sam wanted, it ended, They all lived happily ever after, (until they died).
Yeah, I had no idea this was even a criticism that existed. Everyone and every story got an ending. As it should be.
@@hammondOT Yeah, feels like straw BS this video invented to then "heroically" defeat...
@@KuK137I've definitely read a lot of posts from people complaining about how drawn out the end(ings) of the movie is.
I call it one of the most satisfying conclusions to a story of all time, giving us time with every character and plot as they conclude their arcs. They call it boring and unnecessary. It just goes to show that there truly is no pleasing everyone; someone will always be mad no matter what you do or how good of a job you do.
@@KuK137 It's not, at all. It was something voiced by a TON of people when ROTK came out; and it made it into a number of critics' reviews as well. I would hesitate to call it a full criticism, or even a full complaint (I suppose it depends on the person). What I recall is people talking about it in almost a joking way. Nobody was saying it ruined the film or anything (and I don't think Robert is implying that). But it became sort of what we would call a meme nowadays -- "ROTK was great but what was with all the fake-out endings?" -- that became a firmer notion the more people repeated it as common wisdom. For the theatrical cut, the various ending bits had a "fade to white" transition between them that felt a little more abrupt than the extended version eventually did. I think that intensified the feeling that there had been several "false endings" before the final ending, because each fade to white felt (to many, I guess) like that was the actual lending, only to have the action fade in again and continue. Obviously, as Robert notes, it's only people who hadn't read the books who were taken unawares by this -- but by that point, that was by far the majority of the audience.
Well said. The numerous endings are, as stated, because there are numerous stories. Each a integral part of the overall story.
I remember being 13 and finishing Return of the King, and feeling like I'd lost more than a friend. The realization that the story, for me, was over, left a tremendous sense of loss, and gain--loss due to empathy for the characters, and gain, because of the wisdom it allowed me to have in how sacrifice in pursuit of a noble cause can have a deep, priceless cost for many.
I was sorely disappointed that PJ left out the Scouring. To me it represented both that the hobbits needed no outside help to put their lands in order (and hinted at why they had enjoyed their bucolic backwater for ages) and it underscored the true evil and pettiness of Saruman which showed how far he had fallen from his roots. HE was corrupted, THEY weren't.
he gave it a nod i believe when galadriel showed visions to frodo, but ya, just a nod. i get why he left it out though
It would be hard to do with the changes to Pippin and Merry that slowed their growth. Pippin became too much comedic relief.
I get why he didn’t include the scouring. It wasn’t an existing plot thread that needed to be resolved. The hobbits don’t know anything is wrong until they come home, so the entire thing can be cut without harming the narrative.
When you’re making a film, if you can cut something, you almost always should. It’s the same reason Tom Bombadil had to be cut, even though I love that character.
@@brianensign7638 exactly. although the movies had several 'endings', that's one that had it been added to the end after the whole battle at minis tirith and destroying the ring it would have been too little of a confrontation to end with.
Clearest example that the media [book or movie] affects how the story is told. In some ways movies have restrictions to their story telling. Its why even wither flaws I love the PJ Trilogy.@@brianensign7638
Tolkien knew exactly what he was doing in bringing his epic tale back from the heights of heroic adventure to the homely domesticity of Sam's family. He took his readers on a long and gripping journey but at the end let us down gently back into "ordinary" life. I could see what C S Lewis meant when he referred to his feeling of profound melancholy by the end of the tale. I felt quite bereaved when it was all over - so many wonderful characters having passed away from this world forever. I know that Merry and Pippin visited Minas Tirith and spent time with King Aragorn in later years but that was their experience and not ours. We never got to meet our heroes again and that made me profoundly sad. For me, as for Frodo in his own words, "to me it feels like falling asleep again" when Merry and Pippin said they felt they'd been dreaming as they approached the Shire on their way home.
I had borrowed the paperback single volume from a fellow student in Uni, not knowing what to expect. My heart and mind had been enchanted by this wonderful tale and now it was over and ordinary life resumed. So, yes it felt like going back to sleep again - but I had been changed in my self and things were never quite the same again. I always saw the world in a different light and in this respect I think, Tolkien achieved his end.
The 'returning home' thing is even more poignant in LOTR when you consider the underlying theme of the horror of war. A lot of veterans, though they've returned physically, never truly reach home, because they're too scarred by their experiences. They've left their innocence and other pieces of themselves back on the battlefield. But Sam represents a hopeful, if maybe a little naive, ending. He gets to finish off his days peacefully. But this is fantasy, so that ending is satisfying. Unfortunately in real life, deep scars, mental issues, and trauma never really go away. Just like Frodo's suffering due to being pierced by the Morghul blade never really goes away.
I dont know if you have read the Witcher series but both LOTR and Witcher reflect their respective countries experience with war. For English soldiers, war was something you went out and did in a far away land. For Poland war was a horrible experience that came and permeated every aspect of your life with all the atrocities that go with it.
True, I think a movie that encapsulates that well is "Best Years of our Lives," which is about the return of three veterans of WWII to their hometown after the war. They did not know each other before the war. They met on the flight home. They are all struggling to adjust to a home that hasn't seen the horrors of war and just kind of expects them to get on with their lives as if they had just been out of town for a few years with their day job work. Eventually they all adapt, but it isn't easy for any of them. For being made right after the war, this was kind of a stark look at how war changes those who experience it rather than a pro-war propaganda film meant to boost morale.
Not everyone is scarred by those things, though. So it showed two perspectives: Frodo's PTSD, while Sam was more able to return to a normal life, if wiser and more experienced.
Frodo held onto the ring much longer than Sam did. That’s the reason for the difference.
This is exactly how I read Sam's return. It's a little bit melancholy, because he gets the life that Frodo was never able to adapt back to, and he carries that fact with him.
I always wondered if it reflected on Tolkien's own experience as a veteran, one who got to have a Home and a Life after, while watching many others, like Frodo, unable to heal from their deepest wounds, and perhaps succumbing to them
I simultaneously believe that the scouring of the Shire is the most important part of the book and really the emotional core of Lord of the Rings as a story but if added to the movies it would've ruined the trilogy. It really speaks to how well PJ understood the difference between the two mediums of movies and books and what works for which.
The scouring is intentionally anticlimactic and a big downer because it reflects Tolkiens own experiences of the "great" war. No matter how valiant you fight and how noble you believe your cause you will never get to return home, cause the home you left behind will not be the same that you return to. Be it directly by the consequences of the war as in the scouring or just by the march of time.
This works wonderful in a book format cause a book is inherently a slower paced and more personal experience that encourages reflection and introspection whilst in a visual media like a movie it would've completely taken the air out of the whole experience.
Well said! So many Tolkien fans want a 1:1 pure adaption of the books to the screen, which is understandable but very naive. They are different mediums and require different approaches.
PJ really understood the assignment and did an incredible job of preserving as much of the original story and themes as possible while doing what he had to do to make the story work as a movie. Including the Scouring just simply would not have worked.
Maybe we need more air taken out at the end of movies that show us great wars. It's not like society exactly has an appropriate level of sobriety when it comes to conflict. Maybe ending on a note of "There are consequences to things", as disatisfying as that might have felt, would have been a benefit to society that should feel less satisfied with war than it does.
@@kmenzel I see what you're saying here. But I'm not sure that including the Scouring of the Shire in the film would necessarily have accomplished that. Yes, it would have shown a consequence to the hobbits' homes (even though the audience has already seen, pretty definitively, what sort of consequences the war had on placeslike Gondor and Rohan). But it would also have been another battle. The hobbits would have waged war again, this time in the Shire, and then we would have seen them triumph. Seeing the four of them, fresh from experiences that hardened them in Rohan, Gondor, and Mordor, rallying their people and liberating them, while bringing Saruman to his final comeuppance, would have been just as satisfying as all of the rest. And I don't think the film could have included the Scouring of the Shire without going on to outline how the hobbits went about repairing their homeland afterwards, undoing the damage (over a long period of time and with hard work; and with the aid of things like the magical dirt that Galadriel gifted to Sam, and the mallorn seed), since that was just as important to that sequence as the scouring itself. In the end, despite the grimness of seeing the Shire so destroyed, I don't think it would have accomplished your aim of making people feel LESS satisfied with the use of war as a way to defeat evil.
I read the Hobbit and the Trilogy over and over for years before the Silmarillion became available, and I never felt there were too many endings. If anything, coming to the end of the books just left me wanting more to read!
Last time i was this early, gollum still had the one ring lol
And I'd just heard about some "Necromancer" fellow in Mirkwood
How many does he have now?
@@PathSythe
Depends on what's being measured I suppose.
Magic ring: 1
Personalities: 2
Nasty things to say about the thieving Hobbitses: Innumerable
Taters: Probably none
deciding where to begin and end a story is the part I find hardest. Because no story really begins where you decide to start telling it from, and no story really ends. There's always more to tell.
I always thought of the books ending with Sam coming home as the ending of the Third Age and the beginning of the Fourth Age.
The ending of lord of the rings is the best ending ever written
The Scouring of the Shire was one of my favorite chapters, and I was sad to not see it in the movies. Part of the reason is I read the books when I was a kid, and got very lost in the flowery language used during the Rohan and Gondor scenes. The hobbit scenes were in contrast simple and even humorous, so they were my favorite parts of the books. The Scouring also showed how much the hobbits had grown, becoming heroes, yet also in this very relatable "real world" kind of scenario. You could almost aspire to be one of them, while Gandalf and Aragorn were untouchable in some sense because of all the magic and nobility tied up in their stories.
I was never thought LOTR had many endings. It was always a single ending for me. Interesting thoughts. Also ending with Sam is brilliant idea since he is the one inherited the books! We all know last pages are for Sam. I don't know how The Lord of The Rings book end up in Tolkien's hands tho. lol
And that man ain't telling!
Get the feeling he walked into Aziraphale's shop and as a grieving healing soldier wondering how to put his life back together so that he can live for Geoff and Edith and himself and the angel just gave him the book with smile, saying "you already have the languages down, it's a variant of Finnish with Midlands Breton, I'm sure you'll manage, and it should keep you busy when you need a bit of fun on a dull day."
In addition, the Lord of the Rings is from the Red Book of Westmarch. Bilbo and Frodo have finished their entries and it is to Sam to write the final section and close the book.
Another wonderful and well thought out video. Thanks Robert.
Perhaps in the books that complaint makes sense with the scouring of the Shire, but in the movies I honestly wouldn't mind if they took another 10 minutes to wrap up everything - and that's in the extended editions.
Like, what even are the "many endings"? The ring is destroyed, and then we just get a "they lived happily ever after" for each of the main characters. Wow, big deal.
My recollection is that in the theatrical cut (which, to be fair, I haven't watched since seeing it in the theater!), the various possible end-points that Robert identifies here were transitioned into one another with a "fade to white". And as Robert also points out, each of those "endings" (of one thread or another of the story) is a place where another movie might have actually chosen to end. So for those in the audience who didn't know what to expect, each of those fades to white felt like, "ah, this is the end then -- oh, no, the action is continuing?" I think it caught people off guard, is all. IMO, the endings in the extended edition flow together much better, and by seeming less choppy, they don't call attention to this idea that you've just seen several "natural" endings, with the movie continuing past them. Of course, also, once you have seen the movie, you understand why those other endings weren't "natural" and why you're actually glad that you got to see so many characters and story threads given their due. But all too many films WOULD have chosen to end the film (and the story) at an earlier point. I think audiences are just used to the idea that films often choose to end on a climactic or dramatic moment, rather than taking the care to give us closure with everyone. I hope that people who felt off-balance on their first viewing came to appreciate the endings later.
I never thought of it as having “so many endings”. There are so many threads that run through the storyline, that each one had to be wound down into its natural conclusion. If one of these “threads” had been left “hanging”, I think there would be a sense of dissatisfaction.
Once these issues are set in motion (thousands of years before- in some cases), they have to run their course. There never was just one “ending”.
I have been watching you for years and even rewatch some of them and this is definetly the best. Wonderful analysis 💙
Well, there were many loose ends that needed tying up!
👍👍
Should have been a two parter. With part 2 being called. "The desolation of Sharky"
The Harry Potter story ended within several pages of the death of Voldemort. I always felt that it was too quick and didn't give any closure for the characters. The way Tolkien, not Jackson, handled the book's ending was genius. If you only ever saw the movies, I can see why it seems drawn out, but then I'd recommend you read the books to see what the author really intended.
Harry Potters ending was WAY too quick. It was almost as if J.K. was just tired of the whole thing. That is why, although her books are excellent and I really enjoyed them, they are not LOTR.
There are a number of story arcs and each of these gains its resolution.
Tolkien expressed, through Sam, the idea that stories never really end.
They continue with or without some of the participants they started with.
Sam realizes that he is in the same story as Thingol and Luthien and all the others he has heard about throughout his life.
There is really only one story, though its form varies from region to region, and every person is part of it.
I love this channel more and more. Thank you for putting so much time and effort into these videos, cheers!
My position is that the Lord of the Rings is NOT the story of the destruction of the ring. It is the story of how Frodo and Sam went through this great ordeal and were changed by it. Frodo, wounded to the point where only going to the undying lands would heal him. Sam, becoming the truest of all Hobbits, living the most hobbitish life imaginable. The story ends there because it is the end of their stories. Just as the story starts with "Concerning Hobbits"
Well, Sam's a little more than a simple Hobbit. He becomes Mayor and is in charge of the Red Book and becomes history-teller. He and his wife even journey to the King's court in Fornost, and probably has something to do with his daughter and other Hobbits founding the colony on the Far Downs.
Big story, lots of characters they all need endings.
I'd rather more characters get one so i was there for it
I liked the very end of the Lord of the Rings. The fact that it had so many points where it could have ended just seemed to me like it was more endings of different parts of the Lord of the rings.
The notes at the end show even more endings, like Merry and Pippin putting their affairs in order and travelling south, eventually their bodies being laid to rest in the tomb of the kings. Then the king Aragorn laying down his life before he becomes senile, giving the kingship to his son; with Arwen leaving to return to Lorien. Then we don't know exactly how the ending came for Legolas and Gimli. Did they take the very last ship? Or it's suggested that they built a ship and sailed to the uttermost West? You'd think there would have been a last call to Elf-folk in Middle Earth before Círdan the Shipwright set sail, or when the Havens shut down and the last Elves left there.
@@sandal_thong8631 From what I know Gimli was the only dwarf able to go on the white ships. So I'm guessing him and Legolas both took a white ship together after their travels.
The Scouring of the Shire is my favourite chapter. I understand why it was not in the movie but I missed it.
Tolk was a soldier of the Great War, and like millions of soldiers returning home after a great adventure, then and now, "'I'm home" rings so damn true. As a veteran.
Sam is the chief hero, the one that lives through it all "only" to return home. He is truly selfless, his ambitions are modest. Sam is loyal.
Will Same be the grandfather that tells stories everyone thinks are exaggerations (while being modest recollections, toned down for an audience that can't handle the truth), or his he the grandfather than never wants to talk about the war?
That is the last question that is (perhaps) left unanswered. And it is a question we do not need answered, because Sam is home and for everyone else all is well, and that is what matters to Sam.
Sam told his stories by adding them to the Red Book of Westmarch, the written record that began as Bilbo's "There and Back Again" story of the quest of Erebor. He passed it on to Frodo, who added his account of the War of the Ring to it. When Frodo left Middle-Earth, he gave the book to Sam, saying: "The last pages are for you."
@@MundaneGray Of course the story had to continue. One thing I like about the world Tolkien created is that he adds these part that show how these stories were written down and passed on.
I watched a clip earlier where where Elija Wood told a story on the graham norton show about Jack Nicholson asking him why the film had so many endings? I think the film did mess with the books endings a bit too much, but like samwise gamgee says " one cant be everywhere i suppose".
The scouring of the Shire is incredibly important for me. It's essential to the story. You can't just hide away and hope it all passes. This war is everywhere, even somewhere as remote as the shire. It puts the entire story into perspective and I was most certainly one of the people that complained it wasn't in the movies lol
It was also pretty humorous to have Merry and Pippin show up in full Gondor battle dress and not take shit from anybody.
@ColoradoStreaming also being a foot taller than everyone else lol. Doesn't sound like that much until you realize that's 1/3 higher than the average hobbit lol. That's like living your best life and a 7.5 foot tall dude in full battle armor, that used to be 5ft9in just like you (avg American male height pr google. Blame them lol) when he left for a sabbatical to the other end of the country a year ago, shows up at your doorstep.
I appreciate the more frequent uploads. Thank you for what I'm sure is quite a bit of work to entertain us. I mean you could literally read a phone book and I'd be soothed, so all this is gravy.
Never has there been a more perfect ending, Robert. Thank you so much.👍
My perception has been that any time Peter Jackson was challenged as to why he changed something from the books he would respond with something akin to "Well, I had to change that because that's how movies work." so it seems very strange to me that he felt disinclined to change where the movie ended despite it being a rather uncinematic moment to end on.
(never mind that part of the reason new viewers felt the Return of King was ending multiple times is that Jackson included multiple fades to black - a very common way to signal a film is over)
I screamed NO in the theater when the boys faded to black on that spur of Mt Doom...and the black lasted way way way too long! I thought Jackson had gone insane to leave the story there...and then the scene brightens and the Eagles arrive and our boys are saved...then I could settle back in relief and wait out the true ending...as a book reader, I know everyone misses the Scouring of the Shire, but I miss the Field of Cormallan, where the survivors of the Battle have a major celebration at the Isle of Cair Andros and a bard comes forward to make Sam's dream come true and recite "the Tale of Frodo of the Nine Fingers and the Ring of Doom" to "praise them with great praise".
Am I crazy in remembering that some of those transitions were in fact "fades to white" rather than to black? I feel like I noted it at the time, so that in the immediate aftermath of the film, when people were talking about the multiple-endings thing, I thought, well, the multiple fade transitions were a part of it why people felt that way, and that some of them were to white rather than to black still made them seem like a possible ending... only for the action to resume.
Beautifully done as always, Robert! Thank you!
Your channel is really worth every second! Brilliant work, not to long, not to short and a voice nice to listen too. Thank you :)
And truly, you will not understand the end of this story until you have a child of your own and you come home after a long day of work and they immediately get so excited to see you they crawl all the way across the room right over to you and ask to be picked up.
I remember when the movie first appeared the theatres, so many people leaving early because they thought the film had already ended. I think this was in large part due to how movies and even books are so often presented to us and what we've been conditioned to think of as an ending. I admit that I almost walked out with those people thinking it had already ended and wanting to get to my car before the traffic jam at the end of the movie.
This channel (I only watch the lotr videos) is excellent. And this video is the best example of why it is excellent. Bear with me. First, the guy's diction is composed, normal, but dynamic and engaging enough...no shouting, no superlatives and categorical statements....but a very intelligent interpretation. I'm not a hc Tolkien fan, but...I'm here, aren't I? Right, so I personally have never thought of asking the question in the title of this video. For me it was always clear as day and when people comment that the ending drags out, I often argue the following: All the other possible endings are too epic and...it would take away from the warmth that Tolkien was trying to convey throughout his work.....it was always about a Sam and a small home, a Rosie and little kids running around...the elves, the dragons, the kings, queens, the trolls, the baddies, the whole maya and eru illuvatar....they're either in the way of that, or in service of that...but the meaning of it all is just....a Sam, a Rosie and some kids in a hole in the ground. What I respect about this channel is...well, presumptuous in the first place, but I think this guy actually agrees with me, but accepts that many people disagree, so he addresses it comprehensively, but concisely....these videos are ten minutes long, but you never feel like things are left unsaid, right? I love it.
Also, the pictures are beautiful to look at. I sometimes wish there were more non-peter jackson art, but I don't mind it at all....
Edit: I made the comment before watching the video...now I hear him actually saying it...
I absolutely love this. This is the second of your videos I’ve found totally eye opening.
Fascinating as always, Robert. Thank you.
You touch on it briefly, but for me the choice not to include the Scouring in the films is the correct one. Cinema and literature may have much in common, but they are different forms, with different rules. The films are able to deliver the visual spectacle and action in a way the books can only imply, and the end of this trilogy of films has us exhausted, satiated and essentially satisfied. Adding an additional half hour would be a strain on the patience (and bladders) of the film going audience, and while you are right about the ending tying things up for Sam, the films are unapologetically Frodo's story. Whatever happened after he sailed off into the West, those are things Frodo himself would never know. Unlike him, of course, we can still read the books.
I forget, it is intended that Sam is the author of LOTR in the way Bilbo is of The Hobbit?
...Tolkien has made it a gigantic task to create middle earth, right back to Eru Iluvatar, who made it all, followed by all the ongoings of the ages... it smells of ancient past around every corner of the story (especially in the books), and the future is unknown, clearly also beyond the apparently ultimate victory against evil, which is clearly not the end, as there isn't any end... Melkor came before Sauron, and was even greater than him, and its only a question of time to when the next shadow will arise - there is no escape to the endless tug-of-war between good and evil, and when evil is finally defeated, also the good will diminish, like the elven rings, which can't sustain themselves without the one... when the bad disappears, the good looses its purpose...
Many movies are based on a story, and the background world is only a means to that end, so when the story ends, you can just stop... not so in Tolkien's world: it continues and any victory will fade away eventually, and Aragorn's time as king is terminated, at least by his life span... all things must pass, and they will, and because of that, the many endings of LotR are partly also threads into the new (like seeing the sailing boat leaving, and Sam's children growing).
...as for me, I wouldn't have minded at all, if there would have been a much, much longer appendix, telling me more about Legolas and Gimli, how they explored together what lives on the earth, and under it; show me the ongoings in the Shire with Sam becoming the Major; what are Pippin and Merry up to, Faramir and Eowyn in Ithilien... what happened to Mordor... do the blue wizards eventually show up... Aragorn and Arwen's child(-ren?!); and tell me of the long talks that Gandalf had with Tom Bombadil.. and so on, and so on...
💖🌍🌟
JRR Tolkien was a contrarian. The lad was mad and refused to fit into cookie butter boxes.
wonderful explanation. as always.
a wizard ends his story precisely when he means to
This gave me great insight into the importance of Sam. Thanks.
Having the story end with Sam makes sense because the story begins with the simplicity and humbleness of hobbits.
It ends with Sam being the most modest hobbit imaginable. At home with family, eating a meal. Certainly with no adventure in his future ... as is proper for a hobbit.
I also like how Bilbo's story is called there and back again and Sam ends it off by saying he's back
I only remember one ending.
The movie did botch the character end viewpoints a a bit.
Because Elanor is the Editor, politely it stops once she comes into the Story.
Dang. What a great video! Thank you!
Fantastic commentary!
5:10 "... without many people complaining." :O
I don't know any fan of the books who didn't complain.
I believe I speak for many of us that fell in love with this world and characters that upon the first read or watch we thought my goodness so many endings. Now we think I wish the endings never ended and the story kept going for we never want it to end. Sigh.
I liked _The Hobbit_ the first time I read it, but I don't think I was that fond of _The Lord of the Rings_ the first time I read that. It seemed overly long and complicated.
The road goes ever on. :)
The Scouring of the Shire was always one of my favourite parts of the books, and I was really disappointed that it was omitted from the movie.
I think Tolkien said it was so important to him because it was his feeling of coming back home from the first world war. I think he said it was one of the first things he envisioned of the story when they set out, and Sam gets a glimpse of it from the Mirror of Galadriel. Sadly, she didn't remind them to hurry home or see that some of the scouring could be prevented if they had. Of course Gandalf probably didn't know what was happening in the Shire until their return to the inn at Bree. But these people had their own concerns at this time.
You have a brilliant mind Robert, and an exquisite way with words and language. Thank you so very much for many evenings listening to your story telling and the sound of your voice. You have a very special gift and you use it very well. Thank you.
I'd love to see a discussion of how LotR and Tolkien's legendarium influenced fantasy that came afterward, in particular Dungeons and Dragons.
For example, the demon balor in DnD is an obvious homage to the Balrog.
As a long time admirer of The Lord of the Rings (first read in 1967), The Scouring of the Shire has always been one of my favourite chapters...most especially the freeing of Lobelia Sackville-Baggins from the lock-ups in Michel Delving and her and Frodo's reconciliation. I missed this greatly in the films (which were also expertly done).
While I understood why it wasn't in the film, for pacing reasons, I did hold out a slight hope that they might have filmed it, and included it as a bonus extra on the extended DVD. In reality, even doing that would have been an incredibly huge amount more work and expense, and I guess I understand why they couldn't. But it's a pity.
I will never get tired of LOTR content, thank you for the great essays!
Great Video ❤
I got shivers - of the good variety - when you spoke about Sam. Having first read LOTR as a single man, it takes on a different resonance as a husband and father.
Thanks as always for such deeply engaging content.
Yes, thank you for this analysis.
I read the whole trilogy from 2021 to 2023 and the multiple endings in the third book really hit my heart, they were emotional and made the story even more complete for me, one of my favorite parts is the one where Galadriel "says" farewell by lighting up her beautiful ring.
The Scouring of the Shire also is a consequence of the rangers all leaving to aid Aragorn. They have long protected the Shire from outside bandits and ruffians
Thanks for this. I have always felt that the Scouring of the Shire was the whole point of the entire story. *This* is why they fought and suffered and so many died. Home.
Good discussion. There was a nice article in the old old Tolkien Journal, entitled "Samwise - Halfwise? or, Who is the hero of the LotR?" which opened my eyes to the growth of Sam as more than just Frodo's sidekick. Great content!
i love that all the ends are tied. pippin was very much a child still when he left i think merry was too, which is why there unusual heights were not considered more than a bit odd, frodo had only come of age when bilbo left. tolken and his generation, came home from war too
For me when, I read this back in high school in the 70's, the ending was just as it should have been, I would have been sad if it hadn't followed the hobbits back to the Shire, just like the book the Hobbit. It has always confused me when my friends ask me why there were so many endings, but I've always said it's like the ending of a long tv series, you want to tie up as many loose ends as possible before you go off the air for good and that's what Tolkien has done, I thought.
I think that it just feels very different, when reading a book. You're caught up in the narrative and willing to go with it as long as it carries you. The theatrical experience is different; yes, people get caught up in it. But it's a different kind of caught up, and the visual cues of storytelling in a film work on us externally, rather than the internal way we experience a written narrative. In particular, in the theatrical cut, the various "endings" have fade transitions between them, and those kinds of fades are part of the visual language of film storytelling that often signals a film's end. Not always, but often enough that we don't even think about the way we process that kind of cue. I'm convinced that the "multiple endings" thing struck people so much on first viewing because of that. IMO, the extended edition flows a lot more smoothly, and I think does away with that problem.
I saw the scouring of the shire as war reaching even at home. And they had to fight their own weakness to overcome the threat, as well as heal from the damage done. Even when the war is over, there is still so much to do
In his excellent essay on Charles Dickens, George Orwell developed the thesis that if you took away Dicken's most obvious flaws as a writer you would, also cancel out his genius and no one would have heard of him
Well the simple answer as you and many others have said, there are many plotlines and they all need to come to an end.
The last one is Sam; when he's back...
LOTR's return to home is truly an underrated type of ending in fiction, but does truly convey a satisfying feeling of "all is well, and the adventure now lives on in your memory", as what you're holding returns to its munade form, being a book, or maybe a tape, disc or controller.
This is why Mother 2/Earthbound's ending on the SNES is so perfect. Unlike the vast majority of videogames where you loose control after the final boss, and only watch cutscenes all the way to The End, in this game you get the ability to move freely in the entire world you just saved, get new dialogue from npcs... and ultimately, you make your way back home, where it all started. Your home is the same, but you have changed, and once you're ready, you can tell your mother all the adventures you've had, as the game comes to a close.
LOTR needed an ending to each of its main character arcs. You can't really leave one out.
This is why I find the ending of Zelda Ocarina of Time so beautifully crafted. The credits sequence brings closure to Ganondorf defeated, Zelda returning Link to his time, the future Hyrule brought back to peace ( known as the Adult Timeline for following games ) and its Six Sages, then finally the conclusion of Link's journey, returned to his time as a child, separated from Navi and on his way to warn young Princess Zelda and her father of Ganondorf's plans before he could put them into motion ( the Child Timeline ). While not ending truly in Link's home, it does in a place very close to the beginning of the adventure, right when your quest was established clear.
I love it when stories sort of slowly wind off. From drama back to the mundane. I love seeing what has changed and what has stayed the same. And as I'm a sentimental old man I also need time to say goodbye to the characters and the world.
Drama and action bore me, I like character work. Give me a good hour-long prologue, hold up a card that says "and then drama happened but they overcame" and then spend the rest of the runtime on epilogues of every character and pet that's named or mentioned and I'll be as happy as a pig in mud.
The journey doesn’t just end, life goes on and there fallouts that require the people in Middle Earth have work through not least is PTSD. For me that's why Samwise Gamgee's final acknowledgement, "I'm Home..." is very important. You could say up until that moment Sam despite being home and fitting back into Hobbit life, Sam wasn't really there yet he hadn’t really come home until that moment.
Justed binged a bunch of these episodes - amazing. Love the world of Middle Earth
This was great, I might need to read the books
From a movie perspective, too, the lengthy ending feels actually quite appropriate if one has just marathoned all three extended versions. Kind of like gradually slowing down before getting off a treadmill rather than just jumping off.
Excellent analysis, Robert! I can't remember how many times I read the book before I realised that Samwise is the true hero of the story. All the endings are necessary in the book, especially the Scouring of the Shire, but I agree with those who say it would not have succeeded in the movie. In action films there is often a false climax, when the hero thinks the villain has been defeated and we all start to relax, then suddenly something else happens and we're plunged into another grand battle. If Peter Jackson had tried to do that in LotR, it would have failed completely because the Scouring is a relatively minor episode after the War of the Ring, even though it is of central importance to the hobbits.
It's 01:32 in South Africa and i am up immersed in this video❤❤❤
I've read all of Tolkien's works, and he makes his world seem so believable, like it really existed.
Yeah, you right!
I couldn't agree with a single bit of this analysis any more than l do. Bravo. And yes, l quite agree with you and with Tolkien himself that Sam is the true, greatest hero of the entire saga. The story could not possibly end without Sam being back at home, and at peace.
Another important message in The Scouring of the Shire, is that even if you go to far, foreign climes to fight a war, it does not mean that your home will not be touched by the conflict.
Personally I love long endings, and I think they’re especially important for epics so that you feel the full weight of them. I always thought Harry Potter ended too quickly.
The ending - the actual ending - is essential as it is the whole purpose of Sam's and Frodo's journey to begin with. Frodo must leave the Shire to protect it, that is his purpose as much as, or more than anything else:
"(I)n the meanwhile it seems that I am a danger, a danger to all that live near me. I cannot keep the Ring and stay here. I ought to leave Bag End, leave the Shire, leave everything and go away.
"I should like to save the Shire, if I could ...
"I feel that as long as the Shire lies behind, safe and comfortable, I shall find wandering more bearable: I shall know that somewhere there is a firm foothold, even if my feet cannot stand there again ...
"And I suppose I must go alone, if I am to do that and save the Shire."
All within three paragraphs! His primary objective in setting out thoroughly emphasized, and his understanding that he himself may never settle down in the Shire again (as indeed he can't).
The books aren't history texts, if they didn't end with the Shire saved and safe (with or without the Scouring action sequence), there wouldn't have been any ending at all, to the actual story.
All the other endings are nothing but finishing off side plots that occurred along the way. You might as well say it could have ended when they got back on the road after visiting Tom Bombadil, or when they reached Rivendell, or when Gandalf explains why he'd been missing. The books aren't about defeating Sauron or establishing Aragorn as King, or reuniting with everybody; the books describe what the Hobbits experienced, prominently including the return of the king (intentionally lower case), on their quest to save the Shire!
I recently saw an interesting analysis comparison of the books and movies, and how the Scouring was left out of the movies.
In essence, Tolkien lived through WWI, and returned home to a war-torn country. He was changed, and so was his home, and they all had to work to heal from the scars of The Great War.
Whereas Jackson and the rest of the production team are Kiwi, New Zealand was largely unscathed if not completely unaffected by either World Wars. However, they did send men to Europe to assist. And so when their boys came home, they came home changed, though their home was the same. Many probably felt like they couldn’t fit in any more.
Jackson & Co most likely weren’t thinking of this when they left out the Scouring chapter (script length and medium capabilities was the more likely), but for me it’s an interesting comparison between the two “authors” of the various versions of the same work, and their cultures’ and countries’ respective views of the World Wars.