• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Saruman cut from ROTK

It's messed up, because he was a major player in the first two, and there's no final resolution on what happens to him after the Ents tear up Isengard. But I understand their reasons for doing it.
 
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
It's messed up, because he was a major player in the first two, and there's no final resolution on what happens to him after the Ents tear up Isengard. But I understand their reasons for doing it.

What are the reasons?
 
Originally posted by: Train
probly so they can add it to the DVD, having deleted scenes will make it sell more.

You don't cut one of the major antagonists in the story just to have material for deleted scenes on a special edition DVD. That's stuff you leave in. Filler dialoge scenes and extra battle scenes, yes. A major character, NO.

Frankly, it's disrespectful to an actor of Christopher Lee's caliber and reputation to treat him in such a way without any kind of explanation. Peter Jackson and New Line should be ashamed, but it's doubtful they are.
 
Originally posted by: fanerman91
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
It's messed up, because he was a major player in the first two, and there's no final resolution on what happens to him after the Ents tear up Isengard. But I understand their reasons for doing it.

What are the reasons?

From the story I had read earlier, it was basically that Saruman was not in ROTK at all, and that adding him in at the beginning would be out of place and would break the flow of the story.
 
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Originally posted by: fanerman91
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
It's messed up, because he was a major player in the first two, and there's no final resolution on what happens to him after the Ents tear up Isengard. But I understand their reasons for doing it.

What are the reasons?

From the story I had read earlier, it was basically that Saruman was not in ROTK at all, and that adding him in at the beginning would be out of place and would break the flow of the story.

So you have never read the book? He appears several times in ROTK.
 
Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Originally posted by: fanerman91
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
It's messed up, because he was a major player in the first two, and there's no final resolution on what happens to him after the Ents tear up Isengard. But I understand their reasons for doing it.

What are the reasons?

From the story I had read earlier, it was basically that Saruman was not in ROTK at all, and that adding him in at the beginning would be out of place and would break the flow of the story.

So you have never read the book? He appears several times in ROTK.

I really don't remember him having any other scenes in the third book beside the Scourge which was never gonna be in the film to begin with.
 
Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Originally posted by: fanerman91
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
It's messed up, because he was a major player in the first two, and there's no final resolution on what happens to him after the Ents tear up Isengard. But I understand their reasons for doing it.

What are the reasons?

From the story I had read earlier, it was basically that Saruman was not in ROTK at all, and that adding him in at the beginning would be out of place and would break the flow of the story.

So you have never read the book? He appears several times in ROTK.

I have never read the book.. I do not read the fantasy genre.
 
Originally posted by: hawkeye81x
I really don't remember him having any other scenes in the third book beside the Scourge which was never gonna be in the film to begin with.

The Scourge (whatever it was called - scourge doesn't sound quite right) was the finale of the whole damn hobbit/lord of the rings story cycle. Does this mean that they aren't going to have Frodo/Bilbo/The elves passing in to the West at the end?
 
Originally posted by: hawkeye81x
Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Originally posted by: fanerman91
Originally posted by: Astaroth33
It's messed up, because he was a major player in the first two, and there's no final resolution on what happens to him after the Ents tear up Isengard. But I understand their reasons for doing it.

What are the reasons?

From the story I had read earlier, it was basically that Saruman was not in ROTK at all, and that adding him in at the beginning would be out of place and would break the flow of the story.

So you have never read the book? He appears several times in ROTK.

I really don't remember him having any other scenes in the third book beside the Scourge which was never gonna be in the film to begin with.

And him fleeing they won't show if they don't plan on showing the Shire scene.
 
Originally posted by: Train
probly so they can add it to the DVD, having deleted scenes will make it sell more.

doesnt matter the DVDs would sell like mad either way, i think they are trying to prevent a super long movie

LOTR TTT special edition DVD has 43 minutes of additional and extended scenes and that movie was about 3 hours long.

EDITED:
I'm positive it will be on the DVD (if they film it, it will be on the DVD)
 
Back
Top