Four Myths about LOTR: Return of the King

Four Myths about LOTR: Return of the King that I have read in reviews.

MYTH 1: The film(s) doesn’t (don’t) explain adequately who Denethor (or Elrond, or Treebeard, or Grima Wormtongue) is, or why they’ve gone insane (or are important, or why he can talk, or why he loves Saruman).

What I don’t get is why lazy filmgoers who don’t take time to familiarize themselves with the backstory of a film complain that they don’t understand it. This is an adaptation of the most popular novel of this century – read the fricking book if you don’t know why Elrond is important. Better yet, just go to The Encyclopedia of Arda online and look his butt up. On top of that, most of the stuff complained about in the films is actually explained quite well in the film, the critics just weren’t paying attention[1]. Denethor went crazy with despair because he was trusting only in his eldest son to get them through the war, and Boromir died[2]. Duh. And if you don’t know who Boromir is, kick yourself in the nards right now. His part was in the first movie. Which brings us to:

MYTH 2: Taken as the third film in the Trilogy it’s ok, but taken on its own merits it’s confusing, muddled, too long, and not a very good film.

First of all, if you see this movie without seeing the first two, you’re an idiot. In fact, if you see any third film of a Trilogy without seeing the first two, you’re an idiot. What person would complain if he saw, say, episode 7 of the first season of 24 by itself, but none of the first 6 episodes? What person would say, “Ok, it’s technically good, but I don’t understand why Jack Bauer is chasing these guys. Therefore, it’s not a good episode.”[3] It’s the audiences’ job to see the first two films. I’m sorry if that seems like too big of a job for you, but you should do that if you want to enjoy this film. Stop fighting enjoyment! Plus, it’s a great film anyway, with really big elephants.

MYTH 3: There’s a homoerotic subtext between Frodo and Sam, feminist subtext behind the story of Eowen, or any number of other subtexts not meant by Tolkien.

Actual excerpt from a review:

“Interesting, too, is the inescapable idea that the only genuinely convincing relationships in the film are homosexual”

Inescapable, eh? Because of all the gay sex, eh? Pick a different word[4], for Pete’s sake.

This really ticks me off. Friendship is not eroticism. Just because the hobbits are affectionate with each other does not mean they’re gay. You know, in some cultures men hold hands with other men and it’s not viewed as anything remotely sexual. Anyone who even mentions in passing a hint of homoerotic subtext between any of these characters should not be allowed to view entertainment again until they grow the heck up.

Oh, and Eowen’s hot. Why did I mention her again?[5]

MYTH 4: This story is racist/elitist because the “White” “Northern-Western” “European” good guys face the “Dark” “Southern-Eastern” “Non-Euro” bad guys.

If you go to RottenTomatos.com, and click on the one review of this film with a squished green tomato symbol, you will be treated to a feast of this myth. In fact, 90% of the things mentioned as negatives in these reviews are more personal attacks on Tolkien’s views on the superiority of Western Thought than anything else. Putting that issue aside for now, I want to know what race these people see the Orcs of Sauron as. How about the Elephant-Sombrero-People[6] (ESP)? What race are they? On the map (assuming the map is Europe), Mordor would correspond to roughly Turkey and Southern Russia. Does this make the Orcs an unholy combo of Communists and Muslims? One review suggested that the Orcs are representative of Africa and the ESP of Asia. I can honestly say these ideas never occurred to me. Are these people narcoticizing before they see films? You have to have quite an imagination for that, considering the Orcs are, strictly speaking, monsters. They aren’t human. And the ESP are pretty much the same as the gondorians, except for the fact that they have allied themselves with evil – a state of mind rather than a race – which Faramir so ably points out in the Two Towers by asking if the dead ESP next to him wouldn’t have rather just stayed home. A better question we should be asking is: Has it really come to this – blasting Middle fricking Earth because it doesn’t have enough black people, or women, (or latinos, or dwarves – oh, wait) in prominent roles. I guess it’s a backhanded testament to Tolkien, that this fantasy world from his imagination could seem so real that political correctness should have a place in it.

The story is really about the evil/good struggle within each person. To not understand that is criminal, considering the way Tolkien/Jackson practically scream it at us in every scene.[7] Unless you have an evil bias against Tolkien or England or ideas like sacrifice, love, bravery, honor, sanity, or harmony, you should have no problem with this movie.

---

[1] PseudoQuoting Ebert: “Gandalf is clearly an old man, yet he is leading the troops into battle. This makes it seem unrealistic.” He’s immortal, doofus. Yet another reviewer snipes that Arwen “seems to be dying for some reason”. Of course, the reason for her illness is explained in the film’s very next line of dialogue: “because the evil of Sauron is spreading over the land.” She’s a frail Elf, doofus.

[2] Which is why he was holding that split horn in his hands that made the audience around you gasp. Idiot.

[3] When the real reason it’s not a good episode is because 24 sucks.

[4] Besides homosexual, I mean. Although you probably could have said that about all the words in that sentence.

[5] The feminist subtext is more difficult to defeat, since Eowen defies the King’s decision for her not to fight, and then proves herself worthy (and piping hot) in the end. However, Eowyn is not a Feminist as much as she just really loves Aragorn and is inspired to fight for him, for his side. She wants to kick Orc ass. Jackson makes this CLR clear. Now, for information about the actual Environmental subtext of the films, see my forthcoming recap of The Two Towers.

[6] So named because I get confused about who they are. I think they are either the Haradrim, or the Easterlings, or both, but I’m not sure because there are just so many names and terms and peoples and places in Tolkien’s mythology. I, like everybody else, have trouble keeping them all straight. But lets not kid ourselves – I would have called them the ESP anyway.

[7] The most glaring example being Gollum’s scenes, where he has actual conversations with himself as if his good and his evil were 2 separate entities.