Mistakes in Lord of the Rings Movies

[Aldarion]

Mistakes in Lord of the Rings Movies

Introduction This post will cover mistakes in the Lord of the Rings movies, as they pertain to the military tactics and technology. The greater mythological / worldbuilding mistakes (of which there…

warfantasy.wordpress.com

Introduction

This post will cover mistakes in the Lord of the Rings movies, as they pertain to the military tactics and technology. The greater mythological / worldbuilding mistakes (of which there are many) will not be covered.

General

Nobody in Lord of the Rings books used plate armor – not even the dwarves. n the movie, King Theoden, Gondorians and Uruk Hai are all shown to use it.

Arrows could only penetrate plate armor if plate was not of high quality (a frequent occurence) and arrow was fired directly at the plate. Indirect fire could still cause casualties through lucky hits, but main effect of longbows at the battle of Agincourt was that French men-at-arms and knights were dead tired (pun intended) once they reached English lines; even so, English men-at-arms in the centre were hard pressed until longbowmen took out maces and joined the close-quarters head-bashing party. This move was quite effective as they were lightly armored, so mud did not have much effect on them, and were not tired (unlike deciptions in some media, and statements such as knight needing crane to get him on the horse, people in full plate armor were quite mobile; plate armor weighted about as much as equipment of a modern soldier, but weight was far better distributed).

 

[edgeworthy]

A Collection of Unmitigated Pedantry has already done multiple articles nitpicking the adaptions.

 

[Aldarion]

A Collection of Unmitigated Pedantry has already done multiple articles nitpicking the adaptions.

I know.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Elves use some weird curved swords, when – being Noldor – they ought to use straight swords of the same type the Men of the West use (in fact, longswords are a Noldorin design to begin with).

Probably helps differentiate the two forces more clearly beyond their armor and livery and general knife ear superiority radiation auras. What maybe considered cheese now was awesome to watch back in 2001. I think it's still pretty cool now as well though.

Bows that Numenoreans use also seem to be wooden, though it is hard to tell due to the lighting (they used steel bows in the books).

Are Steel Bows something that occurred in real history? This is fantasy elves so its fine, I'm just curious. I never heard aboot it.

Easterling soldiers also use bardiches (a type of polearm) along with shields. In reality, it would be one or the other – the polearm or the shield, as using a shield typically requires a one-handed weapon.

Maybe they're just carrying the shields and bardiches together just because they're marching along, not expecting battle. The two Easterlings who investigated the disturbance Frodo and Sam made were only holding bardiches.

Saruman's army marches in neat pike blocks. While this would be a logical choice if they were expecting a field battle, they are actually marching to a siege. And an army on the march usually forms into a column in order to negotiate the terrain better. Neither do we see any baggage train, which would surely have been present – supplies, siege weapons and the like.

Maybe they were expecting to overtake the column or the Rohirrim to give Battle before Helms Deep? The Uruk-Hai are shown as being fairly superhuman in their vigor so marching in block might be more palatable for them then in column. They did march the whole way there, then fought a battle the entire night afterwards. And they clearly weren't expecting to Siege the place, but storm it. Still the giant ladders and launchers were with the troops so maybe it was over the horizon of the shots.

in fact, much taller than it is wide, and more space appears to be taken up by city defences than by the houses of the living.

And what fine defenses those layered walls turned out to be once the front gate was breached lol. Very poor return on investment.

 

[Aldarion]

Probably helps differentiate the two forces more clearly beyond their armor and livery and general knife ear superiority radiation auras. What maybe considered cheese now was awesome to watch back in 2001. I think it's still pretty cool now as well though.

Agreed.

Are Steel Bows something that occurred in real history? This is fantasy elves so its fine, I'm just curious. I never heard aboot it.

I believe there were some steel bows in India?

Maybe they're just carrying the shields and bardiches together just because they're marching along, not expecting battle. The two Easterlings who investigated the disturbance Frodo and Sam made were only holding bardiches.

Well yeah, but that would be just unnecessary weight. Better to split it between shield-and-spear-men and bardiche-men.

Maybe they were expecting to overtake the column or the Rohirrim to give Battle before Helms Deep? The Uruk-Hai are shown as being fairly superhuman in their vigor so marching in block might be more palatable for them then in column. They did march the whole way there, then fought a battle the entire night afterwards. And they clearly weren't expecting to Siege the place, but storm it. Still the giant ladders and launchers were with the troops so maybe it was over the horizon of the shots.

Maybe if they were expecting Theoden to engage them in the open, but Saruman (in the movie) was clearly aware that Theoden would flee to Helm's Deep.

And what fine defenses those layered walls turned out to be once the front gate was breached lol. Very poor return on investment.

Yep.

 

[Husky_Khan]

The blog post deals with the inaccuracies with military history and the adaption from the Books but I guess the main thing I would only take issue with is whether there's a justification for the change in the adaption. Having listened to the Extended Edition commentaries, I'm fairly certain that a fair number of the production cast did in fact read much if not all of the Tolkien stuff but the adaption probably fell short of being completely faithful in some respects various obvious reasons.

One of them, especially when concerning medieval armor being considered useless or forging blades by pouring them into molds just seem to be Hollywood brainbugs. Armor is basically useless in almost every Hollywood adaption, even really good ones with the exception of maybe the 1981 film Excalibur. I maybe misremembering there however.

And the pouring of molten fluids into mouldings was a thing that occurred in the Game of Thrones and perhaps more forgivably the classic Sam Milius Conan the Barbarian movie and even more ironically perhaps, in those two settings it was done to make "super swords" not just mass produced Orc blades.

I'm forgiving of brain bugs not because they shouldn't be corrected (they should be corrected) but it seems to be a standard in film productions in general so... fine. I won't single anyone out in that case.

The next one is in regards to curved swords and plate armor instead of using the more faithful mail armor and things like that. I'm not opposed to it because cinematically, it looks good. I even like the Uruks being born in mud thing since it fits the theme of Saruman consuming the old world in the fires of industry and even evokes the (unconfirmed AFAIK) metaphors of Tolkien's military service in World War One, serving in the mud and all that jazz like a filthy Orc.

When it comes to making film adaptions of beloved material, I actually don't want to see complete 1 for 1 adaptions. I don't mind seeing creative and artistic license taken as well as practical ones as long as it remains strongly faithful to the lore its adapting. It's akin to a War Movie IMHO. We Were Soldiers didn't end with an American bayonet charge. Black Hawk Down didn't have Somali Machine Gun technicals running around and one of the choppers crashed into an alleyway, not an open square. Both are amazingly gritty and realistic and yes... generally faithful films. A lot of the military veterans in those operations seemed to like them unless they had sticks up their butt. And I don't wanna be one of those types.

But there's still a fine line with both... wouldn't the films of been way better IF there were more shieldwalls at Osgiliath? Wouldn't the film of been better with Orcs pulling down Gondorians with superior numbers and bashing them to death in their tin can armor with maces? Wouldn't the Charge of the Rohirrim been more impactful if Mordor's army was still stuck outside of the City Walls and swept from the field?

Also you would've never had to have the Scrubbing Bubbles Army of the Dead to basically show up and save everyone ten minutes later with one toilet flush. And you still could've had the lore inaccurate but incredibly cool megafauna elephants stomping on people.

Basically there's a very blurry line with everyone when it comes to nitpicking and legitimate criticism.

 

[Skallagrim]

When it comes to making film adaptions of beloved material, I actually don't want to see complete 1 for 1 adaptions. I don't mind seeing creative and artistic license taken as well as practical ones as long as it remains strongly faithful to the lore its adapting.

Generally agreed. It varies per adaptation. Some 'creative' ones are splendid; in part because film is not the same medium as print, and some things just translate poorly between the two.

I do feel that in most cases, a very, very faithful adaptation is generally the best approach-- provided it's done competently. Note that this doesn't always make for a workable film, but could still make for a fantastic series. (Although budget is a n issue, then, in certain cases.)

Tolkien himself was unquestionably of a very 'purist' mind-set, and this is demonstrated in his work. It's written in a way that -- at least in theory -- lends itself ludicrously well to a highly faithful adaptation. By that I mean: the final product would be a joy and a spectacle to behold. It would also be very long (you'd be looking at six films of three hours each, at minimum) and doing it justice visually in that case may be too costly for any studio to sanction.

I'd love for such a thing to exist, though. In every instance, the existing films -- while I like them very much on their own terms -- would only be improved by being more faithful to the books. (Even more than choices in visual design, I am thinking particularly of the mis-representation of Faramir, Theoden and Denethor at certain points. Every change they put in there only detracted from the nuance that Tolkien put on the page.)

 

[S'task]

And the pouring of molten fluids into mouldings was a thing that occurred in the Game of Thrones and perhaps more forgivably the classic Sam Milius Conan the Barbarian movie and even more ironically perhaps, in those two settings it was done to make "super swords" not just mass produced Orc blades.

Ironically, this was actually the way some weapons were made... specifically BRONZE weapons. Iron and steel were never poured like that, but bronze weapons were generally first poured into a mold and then sharpened afterwards.

If we looked back at the trope, part of me wonders if the "pouring metal into a mold to make a weapon" originated with the Sword and Sandal epics, where it may have been Bronze Age stories being showcased and thus, bronze age metalworking.

 

[ATP]

Ironically, this was actually the way some weapons were made... specifically BRONZE weapons. Iron and steel were never poured like that, but bronze weapons were generally first poured into a mold and then sharpened afterwards.

If we looked back at the trope, part of me wonders if the "pouring metal into a mold to make a weapon" originated with the Sword and Sandal epics, where it may have been Bronze Age stories being showcased and thus, bronze age metalworking.

True,they even found some stones used to cast swords.

Back to topic -
1.Elves in movie used something like falx used by Dacians ,instead of proper swords
2.Everybody used plate armour - when nobody did it in book
3.Numorean supposed to have superior steel bows/which was made,but in 20th century for sport/
4.Easterlings should not use both bardiches and schields
5.Uruk hai should not attackl castle with pikes.

 

[Aldarion]

Ironically, this was actually the way some weapons were made... specifically BRONZE weapons. Iron and steel were never poured like that, but bronze weapons were generally first poured into a mold and then sharpened afterwards.

If we looked back at the trope, part of me wonders if the "pouring metal into a mold to make a weapon" originated with the Sword and Sandal epics, where it may have been Bronze Age stories being showcased and thus, bronze age metalworking.

Even then, however, scenes of pouring are still incorrect. Bronze sword moulds had two sides which closed together to form the necessary shape, much like Lego or Kinder egg. Meanwhile, in movies, you generally only see one side of the mould, making it look open-topped.

EDIT:

5.Uruk hai should not attackl castle with pikes.

I always assumed that was because they expected to face the Rohirrim in the open field.

 

[ATP]

Even then, however, scenes of pouring are still incorrect. Bronze sword moulds had two sides which closed together to form the necessary shape, much like Lego or Kinder egg. Meanwhile, in movies, you generally only see one side of the mould, making it look open-topped.

EDIT:

I always assumed that was because they expected to face the Rohirrim in the open field.

1.i knew too lttle to comment on it
2.They still should abadonn pikes and charge with swords.

 

[Typhonis]

The pikes the orcs had to face off against the Roharrin in the battle of the Pelanor fields were too short.

 

[Aldarion]

The pikes the orcs had to face off against the Roharrin in the battle of the Pelanor fields were too short.

These were just normal spears, and without having anything better, I wouldn't say it was necessarily a movie-making mistake. Just tactical on part of the orcs.

 

[S'task]

The Orcs at Pelanor Fields not having pikes to counter the Rohan horsemen wasn't a movie mistake, it was an in universe mistake. Remember, per Sauron's plan, Rohan and it's horsemen were supposed to be neutralized by Saruman and not available to relieve Gondor. Morder's army was already en route by the time Rohan was liberated from Saurman's control and thus could be deployed to relieve Gondor when called. Thus the Orc army had no expectation of needing large anti-horse pikes when they initially marched and by the time they could have known they needed them, they were already in the field and deployed for siege and thus couldn't have gotten as many as needed to provide an counter.

Basically, Gandalf outmaneuvered Sauron on the large scale there and brought Rohan into play when Sauron had planned on them being neutralized and out of the fight.

 

[ATP]

The Orcs at Pelanor Fields not having pikes to counter the Rohan horsemen wasn't a movie mistake, it was an in universe mistake. Remember, per Sauron's plan, Rohan and it's horsemen were supposed to be neutralized by Saruman and not available to relieve Gondor. Morder's army was already en route by the time Rohan was liberated from Saurman's control and thus could be deployed to relieve Gondor when called. Thus the Orc army had no expectation of needing large anti-horse pikes when they initially marched and by the time they could have known they needed them, they were already in the field and deployed for siege and thus couldn't have gotten as many as needed to provide an counter.

Basically, Gandalf outmaneuvered Sauron on the large scale there and brought Rohan into play when Sauron had planned on them being neutralized and out of the fight.

Indeed.Minas Tirith in book had no calvary except 100 Dol Amroth Knights,and some small gondorian forces.
Spears were better for fighting in siege.