Saruman's Death: Major Spoiler!!!

14 replies [Last post]


Admin's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 2 Nov 2000

For well over a year, there have been rumours going around, both in the press and most LOTR sites about Saruman



Domenick Fraumeni's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 15 Nov 2000
  • Post Number: #1

A most excellent response. While I was curious myself, after hearing about a significant change in ROTK, it's just much better to see what happens IN THE MOVIE, rather then have everything spoiled. I do know that from what Peter Jacksob has indicated in interviews about the ending of TTT, I'd bet serious money on Saruman being in ROTK.
Besides, there are always the BOOKS, which will tell you what originally happened. While I know that it seems to be going out of style,there's no harm in reading Wink.

Just 43 more days..........



Admin's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 2 Nov 2000
  • Post Number: #2

Quote:
do know that from what Peter Jacksob has indicated in interviews about the ending of TTT, I'd bet serious money on Saruman being in ROTK

That was already confirmed by Mr Lee, he definetly is in the third film.

Saying that, at one point we were not sure if he was going to. In fact, I thought he was a goner in the second film. I guess that everything is to do with "flavour of the month" stuff. If it carries on like this, it will be the Fellowship who die and Saruman survives the trilogy.



Evil Peter's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 4 Nov 2002
  • Post Number: #3

I'd bet all I own that Saruman won't die in the battle of Helm's Deep and recently Peter Jackson said that that battle ends about 10 minutes before the movie ends and I doubt that they can manage to run up to Isengard and kill Saruman in that time.

So if Saruman would die when Gandalf and the others come there it would still be in RotK.



Pam Stockbarger's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2000
  • Post Number: #4

I like the quote from Ian McKellen on his website:

"Can you verify if Saruman dies from a fall from Orthanc and is consequently left out of the rest of the film?

A: As for Saruman's death, I can't anticipate where exactly this will happen within the finished third film and am sorry that you will have to wait more than two years to find out." (July 2001)

Sir Ian was erroneously quoted in February 2002 (by Lights Out Entertainment) that on TheOneRing.Net it is stated Saruman died in the Two Towers, with a "large spike through the gut", supposedly from a UK talk show interview. Sadly, TheOneRing.Net is still displaying the "spiked" internet photo and one article stating they have a Call Sheet from the film showing scenes shot with Saruman dying on a wheel, droppng the Palantir in the water beside him. All wrong information, of course.

I am at a disadvantage, as I do not have QuickTime on my work computer, so I can not read Christopher's final answer on this issue. But no, I'm not on another galaxy, ha, I do realize he's in all three films and mercifully sans "spike in the gut" ending to his role as Saruman, for which I say "thank goodness" as that would have been a tacky ending, and strange since it isn't the book's ending. As you said, the truth is out there!

Pam



Admin's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 2 Nov 2000
  • Post Number: #5

Pam,

No QT? Here is the transcript.

"The answer to that, quite simply, is that I don't know. This subject has come up, many times. I've even been quoted as saying that I've signed a petition, which had been drawn up by a lot of people asking for changes to be made. I don't know where they got the information from as to what happens to Saruman in the Two Towers. I don't really know myself. There has been no final decision made as to how Saruman dies. That I can say."

Are you happy with that?

"Yes because there are alternative possiblities. And the one that people think they know is the answer, is not necessarily correct. But I can't honestly say, because that lies in the hands of the director when he cuts the picture."



Pam Stockbarger's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 11 Nov 2000
  • Post Number: #6

I'm happy that Christopher is happy with the ending situation. I do want him to have the ending that he wishes, as I know that will be 1) the most appropriate and 2) the most enjoyable. He's loved LOTR since it was published, and has read it every year, as we all know; he petted the cover of his copy of the books so lovingly on one of my visits, at that time my thought was I so hoped he'd be able to fulfill his wish to be in the films once they were being made. And he is, to all our sheer delight, eh?

(Thank you for the transcription of his comments; my home computer died, so I am PC poor right now.)

Pam



Nilredwen's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2002
  • Post Number: #7

Thank you Juan from me as well since for some reason my computer couldn't run the clip either (though I DO have QT, odd...) I find it interesting that even Mr. Lee doesn't know how his character will end! But I too am happy that it is going to be a surprise since having read the books (more than once!) it is nice to have something completely left as a surprise for me too! Not everything is predictable even for us readers of Tolkien thus.



Michelle77's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 3 Sep 2002
  • Post Number: #8

I am currently reading the final chapters of Return of the King. I'm nearly at the end! (Hurrah!)

I really do hope that Peter Jackson sticks to the book with regards to Saruman's death. I think it would completely spoil it if he changed it, and I for one would feel cheated!



Patricia Smith's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 18 May 2002
  • Post Number: #9

...why it is that even the BEST directors insist on changing major features of works of literature that have become icons, such as LotR? It simply makes no sense to me.

Sure, some of the minor aspects of the story could possibly be altered to save some time. I do understand that any time one takes on the project of moviemaking, one has budget and other constraints within which to work. However, I also feel that one has to let the story be told, as well. If one does not have the proper funding to tell the story properly, then there is either budgeting problems, scheduling problems, or something is just not quite right.

For example, I can see omitting the Tom Bombadil scene. Though fascinating as a character, Bombadil doesn't really figure in the overall success or failure of the group. He and his wife are not REALLY major characters in this sense.

OTOH, if we view this story as a poetic saga, it is easy to understand how some folks feel that no expense should be spared to capture the poetic feel of Tolkien's original texts, even their innate musicality. It is to this end that I feel actors of Mr. McKellam and Mr. Lee's caliber were asked to portray their respective characters - each brings a sense of poetry to his respective character. Perhaps Mr. Jackson simply felt that to do poetic justice to the character of Bombadil would have sent the filmed story off on a tangent that would have taken too long.

Maybe what is, in the end, truly at fault, are our own much too short attention spans. I readily admit that I could watch Mr. Lee and several other gifted actors and actresses ENDLESSLY, again, because of the sense of poetry and beauty they bring to the roles they create from a mere script.



Brandon's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2002
  • Post Number: #10

Can anyone tell me what Mr. Lee's response was? I can't seem to get the audio to download...or the picture for that matter.

Thanks

__________________



Lone Wolf Nr1's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 10 Nov 2002
  • Post Number: #11

What a pity. I cannot open this file with my Media Player.



Jill's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 17 Jul 2001
  • Post Number: #12

Arlyss, althought I am not an actor or work in any actual capacity with films (other than film criticism), I believe that as a writer, I can answer your question. It would be virtually impossible to portray all of the nuances of a literary work, especially an epic work like LotR. I believe that PJ did as much as he could do--I know for a fact that he fought like a lion to keep as much as he could. I am frankly amazed at what he was able to do and get away with, considering the money-muckity-muck producers. I will hand them the prize this time, though--because of New Line, I have finally lived to see a decent version of it. Even better, I always thought Mr. Lee would make an excellent leading character in it, and I am very happy that he has realized at last this life-long dream of his, and that we are graced with his interpretation of it! I have seen many bad films made of books and other stories I liked--for example, despite the fact that Stanley Kubrick's The Shining is excellent, it isn't King's The Shining. It just isn't. Directors do it how they think they can make it work. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't, and sometimes the story is altered so much you don't even recognize it!

Nevertheless, despite my purist leanings for Tolkien, I understand very well why PJ did what he did. Bombadil and Goldberry were not originally part of Tolkien's overall conception, but characters of a poem who got stuck in Fellowship, so it's obvious why they wouldn't work--they never did really belong--and that part of the text is one of my favorites! The only thing that does fit is how Merry came about his Numenorean dagger/sword, which figures as an important feature of RotK, but which had to be altered because of the exclusion of the barrowdowns episode. I happen to prefer Zenarwen to the book Arwen, because as a character, she's too much of a Miranda--too cardboard-cutout flat to be such an important person, without showing the audience why she is coveted so highly by Aragorn! I LOVE the new SE scenes, because even just the little snippets of excluded material explain so much necessary to understanding the story--especially in Rivendell with Elrond, Boromir, and the Lothlorien scenes--Celeborn suffered the most for those cuts! The new scenes add so much. I won't say more, lest I spoil for those of you who haven't seen the new SE, but I will say to BUY IT--it's worth the extra money, folks!:1devil:



Admin's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 2 Nov 2000
  • Post Number: #13

Quote:
Can anyone tell me what Mr. Lee's response was? I can't seem to get the audio to download...or the picture for that matter.

Thanks

If you read the whole thread, you would have noticed that a transcript was already published;) , nonetheless here it is again:

"The answer to that, quite simply, is that I don't know. This subject has come up, many times. I've even been quoted as saying that I've signed a petition, which had been drawn up by a lot of people asking for changes to be made. I don't know where they got the information from as to what happens to Saruman in the Two Towers. I don't really know myself. There has been no final decision made as to how Saruman dies. That I can say."



Luke Farookhi's picture
  • Online Status: Offline
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2002
  • Post Number: #14

I am glad that we see Saruman's death in ROTK. I am confident that, even the S of the S (abbreviated not to spoil it for non-readers of the novel) is not in the movie, Saruman's death will be fitting to the character and with the same sort of principles. I do have a theory of how Saruman dies, but the last thing I want to do is spread false rumours. All I will say about my theory is that it is similar to the book, but in a different place. I base my theory on a single picture though!

www.christopherleeweb.com

Copyright 2000-2011 Christopher Lee Web. All rights reserved. | Terms and ConditionsPrivacy Statement | Contact Us | Top of Page