Frodo, who carries the Ring, and Sam continue their journey towards Mordor, unaware that Gollum, now their guide, plans to betray them and take the Ring for himself. The trio witness the Witch-king of Angmar, lord of the nine Nazgûl, setting off towards Gondor with his army of Orcs. Gollum conspires to frame Sam for eating food supplies and desiring the Ring; influenced by the growing power of the Ring, Frodo is taken in by the deception, and orders Sam to go home. Gollum then tricks Frodo into venturing into the lair of the giant spider Shelob. Frodo narrowly escapes and confronts Gollum, who falls down a chasm after a scuffle. Shelob discovers, paralyzes, and binds Frodo, but is wounded and driven away by a returning Sam, who, mourning Frodo's apparent death, takes the Ring. Sam realizes his mistake when a group of Orcs takes Frodo captive, but manages to rescue Frodo as the Orcs fight among themselves. Now inside Mordor, the hobbits continue towards Mount Doom, their destination.
The muster of Rohan, and the subplot in which the Rohirrim are aided by the primitive Drúedain during their journey to the besieged Gondor are excised from the film. The Red Arrow brought by a messenger from Gondor to ask for Rohan's aid is absent. Éowyn's presence on the battlefield is unknown to the reader until she takes off her helmet, but in the film the audience is aware, as it would have been difficult to have Miranda Otto playing a man.[17] When hope seems lost, Gandalf comforts Pippin by telling him of the Undying Lands, based on a descriptive passage in the book's final chapter.[14]
The Return Of The King Journey Book Pdf
The film altered the circumstances of Théoden's death; his death speech, in which he names Éomer the new king in the book, is trimmed and delivered to Éowyn instead of Merry, with an earlier scene in the Extended Edition even implying that Éowyn is next in line for the throne. Théoden's rallying speech ("To death!") before the initial charge in the film is spoken by Éomer in the book when he believes that both Théoden and Éowyn have been killed in combat with the Witch King.[14]
Although the film runs for another approximately 20 minutes after the climactic Downfall of Barad-dûr, many following events from the book are omitted or altered in the film. Aragorn's coronation takes place in form of a great ceremony in the Citadel of Minas Tirith, opposed to the book, where Aragorn is crowned in his tent on the Pelennor Fields before entering the city. Omitted entirely are the camp at the Field of Cormallen, Aragorn's business in Minas Tirith, Aragorn and Arwen's wedding, Galadriel and Celeborn being present at the ceremonies and their subsequent travelling along with the company, Théoden's funeral at Edoras, the complete journey back to the Shire with stops at Rivendell and Bree, and the Scouring of the Shire, which was seen by the screenwriters as anticlimactic.[14]
With the positive response to Bloom, Legolas was given a fight with a mûmak,[32] and Howard Shore also appeared in a cameo during Legolas and Gimli's drinking game at Edoras.[33] The final scenes shot were Aragorn escaping the Skull avalanche, and Frodo finishing his book. The cast also received various props associated with their characters, although John Rhys-Davies burned his final Gimli prosthetic. Viggo Mortensen headbutted the stunt team goodbye.[9] Pick-ups ended on 27 June 2003.[32]
Like its two predecessors, The Return of the King was released to universal critical acclaim. Alan Morrison of Empire gave the film a perfect score of five stars. In his review, he called the film "the resounding climax to a landmark in cinema history" and praised how Peter Jackson had "kept the momentum of the series rolling on and on through the traditionally 'difficult' middle part and 'weak' finale, delivering a climax to the story that's neater and more affecting than what Tolkien managed on the printed page." Morrison also mentioned how fans of the films "who have walked beside these heroes every step of the way on such a long journey deserve the emotional pay-off as well as the action peaks, and they will be genuinely touched as the final credits roll."[81] Elvis Mitchell for The New York Times lauded the acting, the craft of the technical crew, and Jackson's direction, describing The Return of the King as "a meticulous and prodigious vision made by a director who was not hamstrung by heavy use of computer special-effects imagery."[82] Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times gave the film three and a half stars out of four, saying that it is "such a crowning achievement, such a visionary use of all the tools of special effects, such a pure spectacle, that it can be enjoyed even by those who have not seen the first two films." Talking about the whole trilogy, Ebert said that he admired it "more as a whole than in its parts", and that The Return of the King certified The Lord of the Rings as "a work of bold ambition in a time of cinematic timidity".[83] In his review for The Times, James Christopher praised The Return of the King as "everything a Ring fan could possibly wish for, and much more", and described The Lord of the Rings as "the greatest film trilogy ever mounted, with some of the most amazing action sequences committed to celluloid".[84] Nev Pierce for the BBC gave the film five stars out of five, judging it to be the best chapter of the trilogy, since it combined "the 'ooh' factor of Fellowship with the zippy action of Towers". Pierce described The Return of the King as "Majestic, moving, and immense", and "an astonishing piece of storytelling."[85] Philip French, reviewing it for The Observer, lauded the narrative force, the battle scenes, the language, and the visual style of the film, which he related to "the swirling battle paintings of Albrecht Altdorfer" and "Claude Lorraine's elegiac paintings of maritime departures inspired by classical poets." French wrote about the whole trilogy "Jackson's Lord of the Rings is indeed a very fine achievement, moving, involving and, to many people, even inspiring. It redeems the debased cinematic notion of the epic."[86]
In "The Return of the King," Frodo Baggins fulfills his Quest, the realm of Sauron is ended forever, the Third Age is over and J. R. R. Tolkien's trilogy "The Lord of the Rings" complete. I rarely remember a book about which I have had such violent arguments. Nobody seems to have a moderate opinion: either, like myself, people find it a masterpiece of its genre or they cannot abide it, and among the hostile there are some, I must confess, for whose literary judgment I have great respect. A few of these may have been put off by the first forty pages of the first chapter of the first volume in which the daily life of the hobbits is described; this is light comedy and light comedy is not Mr. Tolkien's forte. In most cases, however, the objection must go far deeper. I can only suppose that some people object to Heroic Quests and Imaginary Worlds on principle; such, they feel, cannot be anything but light "escapist" reading. That a man like Mr. Tolkien, the English philologist who teaches at Oxford, should lavish such incredible pains upon a genre which is, for them, trifling by definition, is, therefore, very shocking.
A Flemish Franciscan monk, William of Rubruck (Willem van Ruysbroeck, ca. 1210-ca. 1270) wrote the most detailed and valuable of the early Western accounts of the Mongols. William had participated in the crusade of King Louis IX of France to Palestine and there heard about the Mongols from friar Andrew of Longjumeau, a Dominican who had been involved in papal diplomacy aimed at trying to enlist the Mongols in the Christian crusade against the Muslims. Rubruck then decided to undertake his own mission to the Mongols primarily in the hope of promoting their conversion to Christianity. In 1253 he set out through the lands of the western part of their empire (what we know as the Golden Horde)--that is starting out through the southern steppes of what is now Ukraine and Russia. His roundtrip journey lasted the better part of three years. William had the distinction of being the first European to visit the Mongol capital of Karakorum on the Orhon River and return to write about it. He provides a unique description of the Khan's palace there and abundant detail about the individuals of various ethnicities and religions whom he encountered. Understandably, he was particularly interested in the Nestorian Christians. His describes generally with great precision Mongol traditional culture, many features of which have survived amongst the herders one may observe today in inner Asia.The text here is the translation by W. W. Rockhill: The journey of William of Rubruck to the eastern parts of the world, 1253-55, as narrated by himself, with two accounts of the earlier journey of John of Pian de Carpine. tr. from the Latin and ed., with an introductory notice, by William Woodville Rockhill (London: Hakluyt Society, 1900). Notes and some additional headings have been added, and the text checked against the more recent Hakluyt Society translation, whose extensive notes by two noted Mongol specialists make it the preferred edition for those who wish full scholarly annotation: The mission of Friar William of Rubruck : his journey to the court of the Great Khan Möngke, 1253-1255, tr. by Peter Jackson; introduction, notes and appendices by Peter Jackson with David Morgan (London: Hakluyt Society, 1990). The light annotation provided here has been appropriated from the latter. Alternative translations from the Jackson edition are provided throughout the text in the format [J: alt. translation].The digitalization has been done by Janeen Richards (April, 2002); the annotation and check against the Jackson translation by Lance Jenott (July, 2002).--Daniel C. Waugh
2ff7e9595c
Comments