Why are people complaining about Rotk ending??

I can't possibly keep this topic spoiler free for very long, but I’ll try:
In every review I've read about RotK, people have been complaining about the movies ending, the complaint being that's it's way too long. Even when I watched it in theatre last night, people around me started to sigh and openly complain (some of them a bit too loud thank you very much) about the movie dragging on. For everyone that still has too see it: the ending is perfect! The Lotr trilogy is a 10 hour+ long epic, would you like the end to be under 5 minutes? No you wouldn't. The ending of the movie takes up approx 20 minutes, which is a respectable length for ending a story this long.

Okay heading into spoiler territory here, look away, turn your gave elsewhere...
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*


Now an in dept description of Rotk's ending, with reasons why it certainly isn't too long (I'm not warning you anymore, if you haven't seen it and don't want to be spoiled, go elsewhere)

The ending:
- Mount doom. the ring getting snuffed. Pretty much essential as everyone will agree.

- Gandalf getting Frodo and Sam out of there. Well, you can't end the film leaving our heroes on hell's doorstep now can we?

- Frodo waking up, the reunion of the fellowship. Again essential. Frodo discovering Gandalf is still alive (beautiful), the other members coming in one by one. Without this you would have gone: Eh? Aren't his friends going too look him up after he's saved all of Middle earth? - Of course they are.

- Aragorn being made King. Duh. The movie is called 'Return of the King', Aragorn's rise to the throne is something that is of great importance to the trilogy's arc. Essential.

- The Hobbits returning to the shire. This is great storytelling. Sure we've saved the world, but what do we do now? Frodo completes his mission, but he has a price to pay: besides his inner unrest, he just doesn't fit in anymore. And also: the shire reminds of what our heroes were fighting too preserve.

- The grey havens. The elves and Gandalf leave middle earth. Bilbo and Frodo go with them: there is no place for them on Middle Earth anymore. It's the price these former ring-bearers have to pay.

- Sam getting home. Not really essential, but it's the ending of the book (well, I'm back again), and it only adds what, 45 seconds?

And then the end credits rolled, and I was reduced too a slobbering idiot (my girlfriend thought it was cute, so what the hell).

Anyway, when people think the ending was too long, I figure that they thought lotr was just about 'cool fights and special effects'. It's the journey that matters. It's about these four hobbits that set out on a journey and changed the world. As such, you must have their homecoming, or else the story is not complete.

My oh my, at this time it is official: I have gone on for too long. But I think I made my point.

Too long? I kept on wishing that there would be more, I never wanted it to end.

But I know what you mean, I have had a look on quite a few forums and it does seem to be a general compliant. But one has to pint out this is how it ended in the book (apparently as I am still only on the first book).

In every review I've read about RotK, people have been complaining about the movies ending

Click to expand...

I'm really quite happy about the movies ending.

I agree with everyone else. The multiple endings were at least helpful, if not essential. I could have sat thru several more endings if they had been as good as the ones we got. In fact, I thought the endings were the best parts of the movie.

I liked the end of the movie as it was, but I can also understand someone who is unfamiliar with the source material might be left with the impression that the movie "had a whole bunch of endings, like they didn't know how they wanted to end it" (as a generic summation of the reviews that I have seen).

There are two reasons for this:

1) The length of the film. By the 3 hour mark in a theater seat just about everyone is physically ready to get up and move around; just getting physically antsy.

2) There are at least 4, and arguably up to 6, scenes that look and play the way other movies have conditioned us to think that endings look. These scenes are Frodo awakening in Rivendell, the coronation, Sam's wedding, departure for Grey Haven's; with the other possibles being arrival in the Shire and Frodo finishing the book (and discussion with Sam).


Because people would physically like to stretch out by that point, whenever they see a scene that *looks like* a finishing shot they have a bit of a pavlovian response to sorta prepare to get up. When the next scene starts, it is running a bit counter to that conditioned response. When that happens right at the end of the movie (especially more than once) that can end up being a disproportionately large part of the impression they walk out of theater with.


It is possible (though I don't know for certain) that this impression might have been lessened through choices in editing and shot framing in those sequences. Perhaps they could have been made in a way that didn't trigger that "closing shot" expectation quite so much.

Then again, like I said, I liked it as it is; so .....

Good point about the multiple "closing shot" expectations. You're right, we've been conditioned to know what a movie ending feels like, and occasionally when a movie fakes us out and gives us that "2nd" ending, we can sometimes feel cheated, especially if the 2nd ending isn't as good as the first. In this case, each ending was good, but having one after another must have annoyed some people.

You're also right about the editing, the multiple times fading to black then fading back in might have been misleading. However, I believe those pauses were there to suggest the passage of time. Often a shot of seasons changing can suggest the passage of time, but I guess you couldn't get away with that more than once in the same 20 to 30 minute span of time.

However, I have to admit, I really was not that antsy. I was lucky enough to be sitting in a comfortable theater, but the 3+ hours didn't bother me. The friend I was with looked at his watch at least twice; I didn't even look once. I was also determined to have a bathroom break *twice* before the movie started so, incredibly enough, my bladder was not a problem either.

However, I have to admit, I really was not that antsy.

Click to expand...

I might have been able to find a better word than "antsy". I wasn't yet squirming, and my attention span never came close to running out. However, when I did finally stand up my legs definitely felt like that was a good thing.

I won't be putting my bladder to the test until Christmas day.

What gets me is that they no longer have intermissions in long movies. In the 50s and 60s, for films over three hours, like Spartacus, and Seven Samurai, it was common to have an intermission in the middle of the film. They even had a section of the score written to be played during the intermission, and did an on-screen countdown, so you knew when the film would start. I'm sure that they did this in part to sell more popcorn/snacks and drinks. These days, refills are often free, and adding the intermissions might eliminate one screening per day, and cut revenue, so we're screwed... or, I should say, we have to hold it.

It's the extended fade to black cuts that turn people off. You don't really need them to show time passing, we can figure out they didn't instantly cover ground we've spent ten hours watching them cover. A different editing technique could have been used, one that audiences haven't been trained to associate with 'you can get up now'.

In the 50s and 60s, for films over three hours, like Spartacus, and Seven Samurai, it was common to have an intermission in the middle of the film.

Click to expand...

Less than 5 years ago I sometimes used to go to a very small cinema in Yorkshire, where they still had an intermission in every movie. The problem was that they'd just stop the film wherever they thought best, sometimes in mid-sentence!

This was mainly because the place was run by one man. He'd sell you the tickets at the booth, then run around to clip your ticket and let you in the cinema. When he had enough people inside, he'd shut up the sales booth, and pop inside to play the organ for a bit before the movie started, then run upstairs to start the projector.

At intermission, he'd stop the movie, then dash down to pick up a tray of drinks and ice creams. When everyone was served, he'd dash back up and start the movie again.

It was VERY cheap to go there

I wouldn't care for the arbitrary placement of the intermission, but I still find that charming (a word I rarely use!), and admire the guy's dedication. Sounds like a mom-and-pop operation with no mom.

I wouldn't care for the arbitrary placement of the intermission, but I still find that charming (a word I rarely use!), and admire the guy's dedication. Sounds like a mom-and-pop operation with no mom.

Click to expand...

Perfect description and it was a great place to go see a movie

Only grunts think that the ending wasn't good. After all, there's main plot and several others. So, one big ending for all? Thank God not.

Okay, I finally saw ROTK, on a humungous screen, from the front row center. I liked the film, but I don't think it was substantially better than the other two, which I liked as well. I have no problem with the ending/s. I can see that action fans may think that once the battle is over, anything else is anti-climactic, but I disagree. This is the end of an almost 10 hour saga, one that wrought many changes in its characters. I think it appropriate to show the aftermath, even in this small way, and I enjoyed that part of the film. All too often, films leave way too many unanswered questions, so this was a pleasant change.

Because they are sad .

Holy shit, what a fantastic film.

The endint was gorgeous. Gorgeous!

Even I, the mighty GKarsEye, almost kinda sorta might have come a little close to shedding a tear. Almost kinda.

When Gondor kneeled to the hobbits, it hit me. Yes it was kinda corny, but it freakin' worked.
The look on their faces in the bar- perfect.

The film was extraordinary.

Something to think about.

Sam's fate is the dream ending to the War on Terror.

The ending of the movie was just right. I think Peter Jackson did a great job with the overall pacing of the story. IMO, the books were very badly paced.

Even I, the mighty GKarsEye, almost kinda sorta might have come a little close to shedding a tear. Almost kinda.

When Gondor kneeled to the hobbits, it hit me. Yes it was kinda corny, but it freakin' worked.

Click to expand...

That scene got to me the first time too, but I held back. I was sitting up front and with a friend I felt more comfortable with the second time I saw it, and that time I didn't hold back. I actually did shed a couple tears at that scene. My first time crying at a movie.

The look on their faces in the bar- perfect.

Click to expand...

Absolutely, completely, agree with you. I loved that scene. What a great way to say "we've been thru so much and no one here will really ever understand" without actually saying anything at all.

And then the end credits rolled, and I was reduced too a slobbering idiot (my girlfriend thought it was cute, so what the hell).

Click to expand...

I have to say that the end credits also brought another welling of tears to my eyes. Wonderfully done and a beautiful tribute to all the cast and crew!

Angel