Anyone who has any real experience of Tolkien Fandom on the Internet will know of the renowned Tolkien expert Martin Morales. He is widely famed, not just for his encyclopaedic knowledge of everything that Tolkien ever wrote, but also of many things he did not write. Yes, this man is privy to the innermost workings of Tolkien's mind and, as such, cannot be questioned on any point. You know, up until now, I have been noted for my oppostion to the changes that Peter Jackson seems to be making to one of the most beloved stories of the modern era. In his arrogance, as it seemed, he had neglected to consult with me about any point. In fact, he did not even bother to contact me at all, so you can imagine why I was worried! However, I can now report that all is well - Peter has finally been in touch with me and I have put him straight on a few issues. Now that I have been consulted, this thing will not only be a massive success but will be 100% faithful to the original source material. I know that some of the plotlines may not, initially, seem to be exactly as they appeared in the book. There have been some big changes but these changes are completely faithful to the book. For the many people out there who have problems understanding these issues I will try to explain each supposed change, why it is faithful to the book and why it is good.
I am honoured to be able to announce that MM (as he loves to be known) has agreed to contribute to my site. In his first article, he graciously allows us to read his musings on the alleged changes to the plot of Lord Of The Rings and why they are a good thing.
Take it away, Martin.
MARTIN MORALES SPEAKS!!!
1. Arwen carries a sword and fights at Helm's Deep
What is wrong with this? We know that Elves used weapons and used to fight in battles therefore there is no reason for Arwen not to. Tolkien would have included Arwen in more of the battle scenes if he had thought of it - Peter Jackson is simply helping the text by including something that Tolkien forgot. OK, she is technically a Princess and, again, technically, could be considered a warrior but she is not, REPEAT "NOT!", a "Warrior Princess"! This has nothing to do with the greatest story ever committed to celluloid - XENA! - and anyone daring to use the word XenArwen will incur my wrath!
2. Lothlorien Elves fight at Helm's Deep
Sigh, how many times do I have to explain this old chestnut? I have discussed this at length a number of times and I don't see why I should repeat it now for you idiots out there who haven't been listening to me.
3. Eowyn kills Grima Wormtongue.
Well, why not? It's what Xena would have done.
4. Tom Bombadil is out
Tom doesn't really fit in to the story. In my years of reading Tolkien, Tom is the only aspect of the story that I haven't been able to form a dogmatic and unassailable opinion on and I am intensely annoyed by not being able to answer questions on Tom's real nature. The solution is simple - he must go, he has no relevance to the story because he does not comply with my views. Therefore, as a special favour to me, Peter Jackson has removed Bombadil from the film.
5. The Scouring of the Shire is out
Well, it wasn't in the book. I have read it all and I don't remember that bit. You are obviously mistaken when you say that the chapter was there. Yes, you say that you can remember it but that is not relevant to the discussion. Don't you know who I am? Don't bother supplying me with actual quotes - they are irrelevant. You are irrelevant. I am Martin Morales.
6. Gandalf is out
Another easy one. Gandalf wasn't his real name - it was Olorin. Yet only two chapters actually contain the word "Olorin". In most of the story, Olorin isn't even mentioned! It is only logical that he should be cut. Face it, he's a minor character and no-one will miss him.
So I don't see what you have to complain about; Peter Jackson is doing this right because
he has ME to advise him. Those of you who disagree are mis-using the original text in a way that it wasn't meant to be used. The Lord Of The Rings was a book, an epic novel, it wasn't written to allow people to criticise a movie so to use it in that way is twisting the words and using them out of context.
And don't mention those letters. Tolkien must have been on drugs or something when he wrote them! Or they are forgeries or something. They are not relevant because they contradict most of what I say.
MARTIN MORALES HAS SPOKEN!!
Well thanks for that Martin. Exactly the same blend of informed debate and reasonable logic that we have come to expect from you.
Jimcalagon.