Peter Jackson had to cut some of the content of the book from the movies. He chose to cut content that wasn't related to the story of the One Ring. The One Forest (Tom Bombadil) and the Scouring of the Shire fell into that category.
Thank you for remembering this Chapter of LOTR. I first read the LOTR in my late teens. That was over 55 years ago, at least a dozen readings since of LOTR in full, countless quick reads of various sections or chapters when something or someone would remind me of a phrase or an event or a place somewhere in the world of JRRT - not to mention but in brief, the Silmarillion and Christopher Tolkien"s painstaking editing and books he was able to produce from his father's vast library of notes, related stories and unfinished tales. To me, The Scouring of the Shire always was the coming of age of the 4 Hobbits. When they realized they didn't need to be protected anymore - that they could handle whatever Middle Earth threw at them. Although they had grown in the year since they had fled the Shire just a step ahead of the Nazgul, they did not know themselves how much they learned in their travels and travails. At the time, they had been too busy merely keeping alive, caught up in events epic in nature, the mind and eyes fixed upon the quest(s) they had been chosen (or chose) to fulfill. My only main complaint with PJ's movies was his decision to delete this Chapter. I do not know why Peter Jackson didn't like this episode. To be an eyewitness to how Merry and Pippen, and Sam, rallied the Shirefolk and devised plans to rid themselves of the plague of ruffians that had invaded their homeland. And Frodo, the Peacemaker and conscience for the Hobbits, ensuring retribution did not go too far. Dealing out justice and mercy like the fair and noble peoples with whom he had been rubbing shoulders. This event also had been foreseen by Sam in Galadriel's Mirror, when Sam had been given the opportunity to abandon the quest of the Ring of Power and return to the Shire. I truly believe without it, LOTR would not have been the same book. That is my humble opinion and again, thank you for posting. I will be looking for more of your videos.
I always felt the Scouring of the Shire was the “payoff” for the Hobbits. They had gone through their travails so that they could be able to take care of themselves! I understand why Jackson dropped it, but I was still disappointed.
The reason the chapter "The Scouring Of The Shire" was not included in the LOTR films was that Sir Peter Jackson wisely decided that after the ending he devised, and eleven hours of movie, the viewers would not sit through another climax. So he included a few brief scenes of the "Scouring" in Frodo's scene with Galadriel at the mirror in Lothlorien.
@@williamfleckles there are other important things left out in the films (Tom Bombadil, the Barrow downs etc) but overall, for the "normal" cinema audience it was ok imho, because it would be too long. This was also explained several times in the comments of the specials in the extended DVD versions.
It wasn't wise. It was probably just a budgetary constraint. It created a problem with the movies: the sense of one ending after another. Many critics complained about this when Return of the King hit theatres. The happy awakening of Frodo in his recovery bed in Minas Tirith, the coronation of King Elessar, And then the departure for Valinor at the Gray Havens. None of those "ending points" could be omitted, yet the cadence of the story was awkwardly diminished by not having the scouring of the shire. But then, I also would've preferred if they had somehow managed to include Tom Bombadil and the Barrow Downs.
I probably shouldn't admit this but I can't read them. I've tried a few times since I was in Middle school, back in the 70s. I think it's partly the language. Do you think it would it be the same if you listened to it instead??? I love to read but for some reason, Tolkien and Shakespeare just don't make sense when I read them.
@bethroesch2156 hi Beth, I do understand what you say. There are a couple of very good recordings of lotr, I can't recommend the Serkis one, but the BBC recorded one and made it episodic. I am assuming that you have seen the films? It's just there is so much detail in the books.
I've been trying to read them at least once a year. And I have done so for several years in a row; but for the last 3 or 4, I am just listening to the audiobooks while I mow the lawn or work in the yard. I think that to me, it brings some of the spirit of the shire.
Jackson should have added the scouring of the Shire in the extended edition. Basically the Theatrical version should have been just that but the extended version should have added all of the missing elements (Tom Bombadil, Barrow Wights, Imrahil, Sons of Elrond ect) to truly make something unique.
Want an idea for another presentation? The ending of Aragorn's reign, and the passing of Arwen. Nowhere is Tolkein's prose as beautiful as this: "There at last when the mallorn-leaves were falling, but spring had not yet come, she laid herself to rest upon Cerin Amroth; and there is her green grave, until the world is changed, and all the days of her life are utterly forgotten by men that come after, and elanor and niphredil bloom no more east of the Sea."
Even though it would have added another hour or more, I certainly would have loved to see this part on film. Nothing more than another drink and popcorn help time pass.
Love it! "You are wuse and cruel halfling. I must go hence in bitterness." Bit of work to do yet on the graphics but great to see and the narration is excellent. Less pointy ears and chiselled looks for the hobbits and the landscape of the shire looks quite desolate, harsh and north yorkshire moor-like. A softer, gentler shire more like south midlands.
I watched the film looking forward to the Cleansing of the Shire and was mightily disappointed. The point of the story was how Evil spreads everywhere, even where it isn't expected.
I’ve read the Trilogy at least once each year for the last 50 years. But, when the movie first came out, at first I was of the opinion that PJ had no knowledge of either Tolkien or of the trilogy... He simply got too many things wrong, Wrong, W-R-O-N-G! But after some investigation, I found that the truth was simply that, "A Camel is a Horse designed by committee". And had to conclude, like Christopher Tolkien, that "JRR wouldn't like it." And nether, do I.
I like that it was left out of the movie. In my opinion, it was like a soldier returning home after war. Life went on as it always did, but they had gone through something none of them would ever realize. I think if they adapted it, it would've made Frodo leaving less impactful.
@MorganStoryman perhaps. Or like an alternate ending type scenario. I like the idea that the Shire was always seperate from the rest of the world. Free of politics and war. The weapons the Hobbits brought back with them are the only weapons in the shire!
In the books, 30 Dunedain Rangers (the Grey Company) joined Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas just before they entered the Paths of the Dead. In the movies, that didn't happen - the Grey Company didn't show up at all. (Instead, Elrond on his own brought Aragorn the reforged sword Narsil and told him to take the Paths of the Dead - but didn’t accompany him there.) So that can only mean that those 30 Rangers stayed in Eriador to protect the Shire (and Bree). Which in turn means, the 30 Rangers fought and destroyed Saruman's 300 strong band of ruffians before they ever reached the Shire.
This is actually one of the reasons, as much as I like the film adaptations, that the books are often better done as a TV series. But only if the producers stick true to the story.
IMO the Silmarillion is just some indexes, not a story with a beginning , a middl and an end with developed characters like in the Hobbit or Lord of the Rings.
"They take our stuff for "fair distribution" which means that they get it and we do not" and "everything but the rules was running short - the rules got longer and longer". Do not leave out the economic socialism that Tolkien was attacking.
Not including this was a great disservice. Tolkien spoke of the WW1 generation coming home and setting things right (well WW2 as well…..sometimes setting right takes a couple of tries ). ;-)
I remember Christopher Lee bitterly complained that all the effort he spent in filming this sequence was wasted, as it ended up on the cutting room floor.
@@KentuckyBrad Just to be annoying, Isn't the Shire in Middle Earth? so, it was the battle of Middle Earth? I left a loop hole for someone to amusingly put me in my place ;-)
It is shown shortly in the fellowship of the rings, when Frodo looks in Galadriels mirror. The scouring of the Shire is interesting but the ending was already very long and just like Tom Bombadil and the old forest it became a sacrifice to the medium of film
The movies were a great story, but they were not the Lord of the Rings. The Scouring of the Shire is one of the most important sections of the books. This chapter is the culmination of the story of Sam, Pippin and Merry.
I was dissapointed it wasn't a part of the movie. The events from arriving back in Bree to Saruman's death and the rebuilding of the Shire wrapped up the loose ends. Esprcially Sam's part in the conclusion to Lord of the Rings.
It’s a shame and disappointing it didn’t make it into the film because I think its a really important part of the book, it shows how the four hobbits through their recent experiences were able to galvanise and lead the hobbits to revolt to overthrow Saruman and stand on their own to feet without running off to Gandalf or Aragon for help. I didn’t realise it had been filmed but not shown which makes it even more disappointing. It the only bit criticism I think I would hurl at an otherwise excellent film.
If Peter Jackson had included this, y'all would be begging for the half dozen drawn out endings we already got lol.... This could be another 3 hour movie itself, i'd watch it if Jackson made it with the original cast.
Absolutely logic, that Jackson didn't show the war of the Shire. In the movie Saruman died in Isengard. So how could he, after the war, be the villain in the Shire, impossible.
@@stephenorourke7005 This part of the story seems quite important to me, though. It woudl ahve been worth more time, other parts could have been cut instead
Not only that: In the books, 30 Dunedain Rangers (the Grey Company) joined Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas just before they entered the Paths of the Dead. In the movies, that didn't happen - the Grey Company didn't show up at all. So that can only mean that those 30 Rangers stayed in Eriador to protect the Shire - which in turn means, the 30 Rangers fought and destroyed Saruman's 300 strong band of ruffians before they ever reached the Shire.
Frodo was never present for the "Battle of the Shire". He had departed for the "Undying Lands". It was Samwise Gamgee who upon returning to the Shire discovered the destruction and oppression of the Hobbits. He organised the Hobbits to rebell and overthrow Saruman and his lackeys.
Wonderful artwork! Beautiful narration!! I love how all the races are basically similar and "men/humanoid" but with distinct racial differences but not cartoonish... they appear realistic if they existed. It is clear that Tolkein was fundamentally an environmentalist and curser of "usurpers! Curse them!" WWI and industry, surely....
Jackson killed Wormtongue and Saruman at Isengard because the movie might be too long? And yet he made The Hobbit three times longer than it needed to be. He could have left Saruman alive and imprisoned in Orthanc leaving open the possibility that he or some other filmmaker make The Scouring of the Shire as a standalone film.
How come no-one has tried to build a modern Shire village of those lovely homes with round doors, earthen roofs, cozy and warm. This would be perfect for some cold wet place like Minnesota or North Dakota.
There is at least a half hour show in The Scouring of the Shire, or an entire film if they stretch it like The Hobbit. Perhaps they can shoe-horn Tom Bombadil in, as well?
The writers and director would have to rewrite the part where Saruman was ended by Wormtongue stabbing Saruman and falling off the tower to his end on the spiked wheel.
He killed Sauroman at Isengard so none of this could ever happen, still the movie clocks in at around 3 hours i dont think anybody really wanted it to run longer
The Scouring of the Shire was kind of an add-on to the actual story. It was okay to read it in the book, but the movie was just perfect. There was no need to have this part of the story in the movie.
Read the books! There are so many stories more which didn't fit in Jackson's movie. Tom Bombadil und Goldbeere, Luthien und Beren, Hurin und Turin, ...
Reading is much better than watching cinema. I have read the lord of the Rings more than ten times. Knowing Tolkiens friend Lewis I think, during the war British government did too much "rules" over English people and the intellectuals did it detest.
Easy. Have Grima not murder Saruman at Isengard, which didn't happen in the books and was a change PJ made, because he never intended to film the Shire ending chapters.
Peter Jackson had hard choices to make to keep Tolkien's masterpiece down to 9 hours+ of film. I think Wormtounge should have killed Saruman even if it had to be on Orthanc instead of that fall onto a water mill.
"No hobbit has ever killed another on purpose in the Shire." Smeagol and Deagol lived on the banks of the Anduin more than a thousand miles from the Shire.
There is talk about whether Frodo's parents killed each other, well, he pushed her into the water and she pulled him in as she fell. Or was that someone else? hmm.
They were very important to Jackson. However, he was a realist. The pacing of the film would not allow this Shire scene since it would have been seen as too contrived after Sauron's fall. Film is spectacle. Having a second climactic battle would not have clicked with an audience. Defeating Sauron was the overarching goal of the saga. Saruman was secondary.
Something I don't forgive the movies for. Tolkien's story is multi layered from mighty races to the most simple of creatures. The lowest layer is the simple and old theme of boys to men. The movies removed this important of layers.
I think its a mistake to read the battle for the shire because its ridiculous. A few little barricades and surprise charges. The hobbits finally win. BOOOOO BALONEY!!!
The Scouring of the Shire was written as a polemic against the victory of the Labour Party in the British election of 1945. Discuss.
We don't discuss bullshit here.
No
Absolutely not! Take your political bull elsewhere.
Tolkein very clearly said this was wrong.
Cant decide whether you are simply wrong, or disingenuous. Either way, take it somewhere else.
This was a vry important part of the book. , showed how the hobbits had grown because of thier adventures,
Exactly
They seem to have grown big, pointy ears, too.
As far as I'm concerned, this was the whole point of the book. I was dumbfounded when Jackson omitted it.
The movies couldn’t show it after having Saruman and Worm Tongue die in Isengard.
Peter Jackson had to cut some of the content of the book from the movies. He chose to cut content that wasn't related to the story of the One Ring. The One Forest (Tom Bombadil) and the Scouring of the Shire fell into that category.
Thank you for remembering this Chapter of LOTR. I first read the LOTR in my late teens. That was over 55 years ago, at least a dozen readings since of LOTR in full, countless quick reads of various sections or chapters when something or someone would remind me of a phrase or an event or a place somewhere in the world of JRRT - not to mention but in brief, the Silmarillion and Christopher Tolkien"s painstaking editing and books he was able to produce from his father's vast library of notes, related stories and unfinished tales.
To me, The Scouring of the Shire always was the coming of age of the 4 Hobbits. When they realized they didn't need to be protected anymore - that they could handle whatever Middle Earth threw at them. Although they had grown in the year since they had fled the Shire just a step ahead of the Nazgul, they did not know themselves how much they learned in their travels and travails. At the time, they had been too busy merely keeping alive, caught up in events epic in nature, the mind and eyes fixed upon the quest(s) they had been chosen (or chose) to fulfill.
My only main complaint with PJ's movies was his decision to delete this Chapter. I do not know why Peter Jackson didn't like this episode. To be an eyewitness to how Merry and Pippen, and Sam, rallied the Shirefolk and devised plans to rid themselves of the plague of ruffians that had invaded their homeland. And Frodo, the Peacemaker and conscience for the Hobbits, ensuring retribution did not go too far. Dealing out justice and mercy like the fair and noble peoples with whom he had been rubbing shoulders. This event also had been foreseen by Sam in Galadriel's Mirror, when Sam had been given the opportunity to abandon the quest of the Ring of Power and return to the Shire. I truly believe without it, LOTR would not have been the same book.
That is my humble opinion and again, thank you for posting. I will be looking for more of your videos.
Thank you for sharing your love for Tolkien and the Scouring of the Shire - it's definitely an important chapter!
"You have grown halfling, yes you have grown very much. You are wise and cruel. You rob my revenge of sweetness. "
I always felt the Scouring of the Shire was the “payoff” for the Hobbits. They had gone through their travails so that they could be able to take care of themselves! I understand why Jackson dropped it, but I was still disappointed.
The reason the chapter "The Scouring Of The Shire" was not included in the LOTR films was that Sir Peter Jackson wisely decided that after the ending he devised, and eleven hours of movie, the viewers would not sit through another climax. So he included a few brief scenes of the "Scouring" in Frodo's scene with Galadriel at the mirror in Lothlorien.
Exactly. It made sense in the book, but wasn't suited to a movie.
Wisely? That is debatable. Casual viewers may not car but they don't know what the books are about.
@@williamfleckles there are other important things left out in the films (Tom Bombadil, the Barrow downs etc) but overall, for the "normal" cinema audience it was ok imho, because it would be too long. This was also explained several times in the comments of the specials in the extended DVD versions.
It wasn't wise. It was probably just a budgetary constraint.
It created a problem with the movies: the sense of one ending after another. Many critics complained about this when Return of the King hit theatres. The happy awakening of Frodo in his recovery bed in Minas Tirith, the coronation of King Elessar, And then the departure for Valinor at the Gray Havens.
None of those "ending points" could be omitted, yet the cadence of the story was awkwardly diminished by not having the scouring of the shire.
But then, I also would've preferred if they had somehow managed to include Tom Bombadil and the Barrow Downs.
If Jackson had included every detail from the books we would still be watching the movie, 23 years later.
Id still be watching ;)
So what is the problem?
And wouldn't be so brilliant as a movie as it is(not as a book)
True dat 😂😊
You say that like it's a bad thing.
Read the book people. The films were great, but not a patch on the books.
I probably shouldn't admit this but I can't read them. I've tried a few times since I was in Middle school, back in the 70s. I think it's partly the language. Do you think it would it be the same if you listened to it instead??? I love to read but for some reason, Tolkien and Shakespeare just don't make sense when I read them.
@bethroesch2156 hi Beth, I do understand what you say. There are a couple of very good recordings of lotr, I can't recommend the Serkis one, but the BBC recorded one and made it episodic. I am assuming that you have seen the films? It's just there is so much detail in the books.
@bethroesch2156 and FYI I cannot abide Shakespeare in any form.
I've been trying to read them at least once a year. And I have done so for several years in a row; but for the last 3 or 4, I am just listening to the audiobooks while I mow the lawn or work in the yard. I think that to me, it brings some of the spirit of the shire.
Thank you for not only telling this story but also providing images to better explain the story. Very enjoyable video, thank you.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Oh wow. So now I can "see" the missing chapters. I can only imagine what this is going to be like in a few years. subscribed.
Exactly! Thank you mike.
Tolkien wrote that the scouring of the Shire was an essential piece of the story and was firmly in the flow of narrative before he began writing.
Back when Aragorn was written as a a hobbit named Trotter? I suspect a little bit of retconning in Tolkien;s recollections.
This was an iconic moment in the book.
🙌🏻🙌🏻
This was one of my favorite part of the book series. I was disappointed it was cut from the movie.
They could still film it 👀
The movie has ended well already.
One of my favorite chapters to read. I Always get excited.
Likewise!
Jackson should have added the scouring of the Shire in the extended edition. Basically the Theatrical version should have been just that but the extended version should have added all of the missing elements (Tom Bombadil, Barrow Wights, Imrahil, Sons of Elrond ect) to truly make something unique.
Want an idea for another presentation? The ending of Aragorn's reign, and the passing of Arwen. Nowhere is Tolkein's prose as beautiful as this: "There at last when the mallorn-leaves were falling, but spring had not yet come, she laid herself to rest upon Cerin Amroth; and there is her green grave, until the world is changed, and all the days of her life are utterly forgotten by men that come after, and elanor and niphredil bloom no more east of the Sea."
Beautiful 🙌🏻
This was amazing!!! Not only the animation the narrator blew my mind with his extraordinary voice! 🤯👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Even though it would have added another hour or more, I certainly would have loved to see this part on film. Nothing more than another drink and popcorn help time pass.
Love it! "You are wuse and cruel halfling. I must go hence in bitterness." Bit of work to do yet on the graphics but great to see and the narration is excellent. Less pointy ears and chiselled looks for the hobbits and the landscape of the shire looks quite desolate, harsh and north yorkshire moor-like. A softer, gentler shire more like south midlands.
The feedback is much appreciated - thank you mary! Please do subscribe and make sure to drop suggestions for improvements on future vids.
I watched the film looking forward to the Cleansing of the Shire and was mightily disappointed. The point of the story was how Evil spreads everywhere, even where it isn't expected.
Where can I watch that film?
@@MorganStoryman Well, the LOTR films are 25 years old. Try a streaming service or, if applicable, try to get the blue ray discs.
Outstanding video effects!
And to any fan of the films, by not reading the books, you have missed so much!
Thank you sir for the kind feedback! Hope enjoyed the vid and make sure to subscribe ☝🏼
Yes, great video, but Merry and Pippin were much larger than the other hobbits. That end-draught acted like HGH (Hobbit Growth Hormone).
I’ve read the Trilogy at least once each year for the last 50 years. But, when the movie first came out, at first I was of the opinion that PJ had no knowledge of either Tolkien or of the trilogy... He simply got too many things wrong, Wrong, W-R-O-N-G! But after some investigation, I found that the truth was simply that, "A Camel is a Horse designed by committee". And had to conclude, like Christopher Tolkien, that "JRR wouldn't like it." And nether, do I.
I like that it was left out of the movie. In my opinion, it was like a soldier returning home after war. Life went on as it always did, but they had gone through something none of them would ever realize. I think if they adapted it, it would've made Frodo leaving less impactful.
Lovely take - agree. Maybe in a separate movie?
@MorganStoryman perhaps. Or like an alternate ending type scenario. I like the idea that the Shire was always seperate from the rest of the world. Free of politics and war. The weapons the Hobbits brought back with them are the only weapons in the shire!
Always unhappy this wasn't included. Sharkey was a corruption of Sharku, Orcish for "Old Man".
Nice etymology
Of course we all know the "scouring of the shire", but man....AMAZING images!! very well done.
Thank you sir 🫶🏼🙌🏻 glad you enjoyed it - please do check out our dedicated playlist.
In the books, 30 Dunedain Rangers (the Grey Company) joined Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas just before they entered the Paths of the Dead.
In the movies, that didn't happen - the Grey Company didn't show up at all. (Instead, Elrond on his own brought Aragorn the reforged sword Narsil and told him to take the Paths of the Dead - but didn’t accompany him there.)
So that can only mean that those 30 Rangers stayed in Eriador to protect the Shire (and Bree). Which in turn means, the 30 Rangers fought and destroyed Saruman's 300 strong band of ruffians before they ever reached the Shire.
Wow okay - never thought about that but you might be right. Thank you for sharing.
@@MorganStoryman : You’re welcome.
The serpent had finally invaded the final ' garden ' in Middle Earth... literally Paradise Lost
Great video it's a shame this was missed out of the films
Agree! Maybe then could do a sequel…
This is actually one of the reasons, as much as I like the film adaptations, that the books are often better done as a TV series. But only if the producers stick true to the story.
Absolutely! I hope our video could give a good solution but ofcourse will never come close to the books.
Nice! Next do the Silmarilion, or any tales of the first age
IMO the Silmarillion is just some indexes, not a story with a beginning , a middl and an end with developed characters like in the Hobbit or Lord of the Rings.
"They take our stuff for "fair distribution" which means that they get it and we do not" and "everything but the rules was running short - the rules got longer and longer". Do not leave out the economic socialism that Tolkien was attacking.
Not including this was a great disservice. Tolkien spoke of the WW1 generation coming home and setting things right (well WW2 as well…..sometimes setting right takes a couple of tries ). ;-)
Cheers mate
I remember Christopher Lee bitterly complained that all the effort he spent in filming this sequence was wasted, as it ended up on the cutting room floor.
It was not the “Battle of the Shire”. It was the Battle of Bywater.
Bywater which is in the shire 😂😂😂
@@KentuckyBrad Just to be annoying, Isn't the Shire in Middle Earth? so, it was the battle of Middle Earth?
I left a loop hole for someone to amusingly put me in my place ;-)
It is shown shortly in the fellowship of the rings, when Frodo looks in Galadriels mirror. The scouring of the Shire is interesting but the ending was already very long and just like Tom Bombadil and the old forest it became a sacrifice to the medium of film
The movies were a great story, but they were not the Lord of the Rings. The Scouring of the Shire is one of the most important sections of the books. This chapter is the culmination of the story of Sam, Pippin and Merry.
I was dissapointed it wasn't a part of the movie. The events from arriving back in Bree to Saruman's death and the rebuilding of the Shire wrapped up the loose ends. Esprcially Sam's part in the conclusion to Lord of the Rings.
It’s a shame and disappointing it didn’t make it into the film because I think its a really important part of the book, it shows how the four hobbits through their recent experiences were able to galvanise and lead the hobbits to revolt to overthrow Saruman and stand on their own to feet without running off to Gandalf or Aragon for help. I didn’t realise it had been filmed but not shown which makes it even more disappointing. It the only bit criticism I think I would hurl at an otherwise excellent film.
Honestly, the waaaay too long goodbye at the Havens could’ve left room for the Shire battle
If Peter Jackson had included this, y'all would be begging for the half dozen drawn out endings we already got lol.... This could be another 3 hour movie itself, i'd watch it if Jackson made it with the original cast.
Definitely would get another 45 oscars
Absolutely logic, that Jackson didn't show the war of the Shire. In the movie Saruman died in Isengard. So how could he, after the war, be the villain in the Shire, impossible.
True, but even more, is that the movie(s) were exceedingly long, and to be more accurate, Jackson would've had to add at least another hour!!
@@stephenorourke7005 This part of the story seems quite important to me, though. It woudl ahve been worth more time, other parts could have been cut instead
Not only that:
In the books, 30 Dunedain Rangers (the Grey Company) joined Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas just before they entered the Paths of the Dead.
In the movies, that didn't happen - the Grey Company didn't show up at all. So that can only mean that those 30 Rangers stayed in Eriador to protect the Shire - which in turn means, the 30 Rangers fought and destroyed Saruman's 300 strong band of ruffians before they ever reached the Shire.
Frodo was never present for the "Battle of the Shire". He had departed for the "Undying Lands".
It was Samwise Gamgee who upon returning to the Shire discovered the destruction and oppression of the Hobbits.
He organised the Hobbits to rebell and overthrow Saruman and his lackeys.
This isn't even close to the ending in the book. The ending in the book was much much better.
Peter, Fran and Philippa were right to leave this out of the films. It works in the book but on screen there really wasn't any place for it.
What I want to know is why the hobbits are wearing boots? they never put anything on their feet.
Wonderful artwork! Beautiful narration!! I love how all the races are basically similar and "men/humanoid" but with distinct racial differences but not cartoonish... they appear realistic if they existed. It is clear that Tolkein was fundamentally an environmentalist and curser of "usurpers! Curse them!" WWI and industry, surely....
Agree! Thank you for the kind words sara!
Jackson killed Wormtongue and Saruman at Isengard because the movie might be too long? And yet he made The Hobbit three times longer than it needed to be. He could have left Saruman alive and imprisoned in Orthanc leaving open the possibility that he or some other filmmaker make The Scouring of the Shire as a standalone film.
When it comes to the Hobbit I think it is more about corporate greed.
How come no-one has tried to build a modern Shire village of those lovely homes with round doors, earthen roofs, cozy and warm. This would be perfect for some cold wet place like Minnesota or North Dakota.
You are right, it would be the perfect place to escape the harsh winters
Where is the Parthenon in the USA? I know a rich fella built an exact replica somewhere.
@@burstcity3832 There is a Parthenon in Nashville Tennessee. I went to Vanderbilt and did a lot of things there.
New Zealand where it was filmed, some things remain as tourist attractions.❤
There is at least a half hour show in The Scouring of the Shire, or an entire film if they stretch it like The Hobbit. Perhaps they can shoe-horn Tom Bombadil in, as well?
The writers and director would have to rewrite the part where Saruman was ended by Wormtongue stabbing Saruman and falling off the tower to his end on the spiked wheel.
The hobbits here are wearing boots, contrary to the books.
It was Saruman and Wormtongue, who were killed off in the movies, it could never happen in Peter Jackson's movies
They died the same way though, Saruman was stabbed by Grimefoot and Grimefoot was shot with arrows.
Hobbits have hairy feet and don’t wear shoes
Thank You!!
4:48 what a hand!
He killed Sauroman at Isengard so none of this could ever happen, still the movie clocks in at around 3 hours i dont think anybody really wanted it to run longer
Since when did Hobbits wear shoes??
The Scouring of the Shire was kind of an add-on to the actual story. It was okay to read it in the book, but the movie was just perfect. There was no need to have this part of the story in the movie.
Apart from Frodo's face when he's about to get on the boat, looks like he's trying to go to the toilet and it's not cooperating.
Read the books! There are so many stories more which didn't fit in Jackson's movie. Tom Bombadil und Goldbeere, Luthien und Beren, Hurin und Turin, ...
!!!!! Thank you
Reading is much better than watching cinema. I have read the lord of the Rings more than ten times. Knowing Tolkiens friend Lewis I think, during the war British government did too much "rules" over English people and the intellectuals did it detest.
I like the death of Saruman in the extended version of the Two Towers/Return of the King where Wormtongue kills his cruel master at Orthank (sp?)
The books open a new frontier; you open your mind and imagination
Is this story a foreshadow of what comes?
Should be part 4
4:50 legit looks like a hand is emerging from the cloak.
Would I watch this movie please just one movie
How could PJ show the battle of the Shire/Bywater as Saruman was murdered at Isengard by Grima?
Easy. Have Grima not murder Saruman at Isengard, which didn't happen in the books and was a change PJ made, because he never intended to film the Shire ending chapters.
@@HDreamer lol, PJ is a heretic!
How did saurmon come back when he was killed?
Saruman? He died in the Shire in the book and didn't come back.
Peter Jackson had hard choices to make to keep Tolkien's masterpiece down to 9 hours+ of film. I think Wormtounge should have killed Saruman even if it had to be on Orthanc instead of that fall onto a water mill.
I understand why he put it in but i feel it was superfluous.
I missed this part … should have been included in the movie or a least added to the DVD box set.
READ THE BOOKS ......
Why are all the Hobbit houses built to exactly the same pattern and all have the same front door colour? Is that the Hobbiton council estate?
I was disappointed it wasn't in the film.
Me too!
I think this is happening right now in the US!!!
The Movie has ended very well already.
Peter Jackson let his personal feelings prevented it I believe. It was hardly men, there were mostly half-orcs.
The storm blessed archives
The films were great ...but they missed the ending.
Agree!
Why are the Hobbits wearing boots?
Why are they wearing shoes? Normally they're barefoot. Only the fallowhides are wearing boots when there is muddy weather.
3:00 one hobbit did kill another on purpose. Smeagol vs Deagol
True! Nice catch - thank you! Please make sure to subscribe and enlighten us with your expertise on future vids.
Technically not Hobbits. River People
"No hobbit has ever killed another on purpose in the Shire." Smeagol and Deagol lived on the banks of the Anduin more than a thousand miles from the Shire.
There is talk about whether Frodo's parents killed each other, well, he pushed her into the water and she pulled him in as she fell. Or was that someone else? hmm.
Hobbits didn't wear boots.
Obviously not filmed at Matamata in New Zealand. Looks like Britain.
The LOTR was pretty much based on the map of Europe..I get your point, I was just being a nerd.
Yeah it was kind of a very much needed conclusion to the trilogy. The books weren't all that important to Jackson though.
They were very important to Jackson. However, he was a realist. The pacing of the film would not allow this Shire scene since it would have been seen as too contrived after Sauron's fall. Film is spectacle. Having a second climactic battle would not have clicked with an audience. Defeating Sauron was the overarching goal of the saga. Saruman was secondary.
Something I don't forgive the movies for. Tolkien's story is multi layered from mighty races to the most simple of creatures. The lowest layer is the simple and old theme of boys to men. The movies removed this important of layers.
Should have been in movie
Make a movie of it! They look too short and their faces, like kids!
pretty much EVERYONE who actually read the books knows this.
The problem is fewer than you think watched the movies but didnt read the books.
@@MorganStoryman I think you got that the wrong way around? I agree though.
Excellent presentation, thanks.
But frodo is already in valinor after the lord of the ring
I think its a mistake to read the battle for the shire because its ridiculous. A few little barricades and surprise charges. The hobbits finally win. BOOOOO BALONEY!!!
🤣🤣
But in the movie he was killed, ?
Saruman was killed by Wormtongue atop Orthanc in Isengard instead of The Shire in the novel.
More correctly its called the Battle of the Bywater. Its never called the Battle of the Shire in the books.
You are absolutely right sir! Thank you.
The whole chapter is called The Scouring of the Shire, of which the Battle of Bywater was a part.
I just kicked Sauron's butt. Now I'm going to kick yours.
Uh....Hobbits don't wear boots. They go "unshod". Just say'n.
I missed this part in the movies to
Gee I wonder why?
That's cause Saruman or sharky was dead
Hobbits wearing boots?
I think that's just what they wear during the war, though I could be wrong 😉
@@MorganStoryman Hobboots?
Peter Jackson couldn’t show this, because he killed off Saruman in Isengard…
He killed of Saruman in Isengard because the additional time to tell this part of the story would take too long.
I am OK with this part of the books not being in the movie.