Differences Between Jackson's Movies and Tolkien's Books

Overview
Any work of the scale of Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings movie screenplay was going to exhibit differences from the source material. While the three movies had a large number of minor and trivial differences from the book, there were quite a few substantial differences as well. These major differences take two forms—1. differences in form; this includes changes made to the story by deleting or adding parts or spreading ideas over a long period of time, and 2. differences in substance, which included changing actual ideas and people in the story to suit the film. Some such changes include the changing of almost all the characters and changing events to reach the same outcome as the book.

The director and writers of the motion pictures faced some significant challenges in bringing Tolkien's work to the big screen. Not the least of these was the enormous scale of the story. The Lord of the Rings is a very lengthy story that was, itself, derived from a fictional universe of prodigious dimensions. In it, an entirely original world of the author's manufacture forms the backdrop of a story with multiple intelligent races (Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, Ents and Men), their many languages and dialects, a highly developed historical narrative, and a minutely detailed geography of the world that had, itself, changed significantly over time. The result of all this is a level of complexity that is very difficult to apprehend in a screenplay. How does one go about presenting, for example, the historical background of a story that spans an enormous period of history that is outside the scope of the movie to be filmed? The difficulties the writers faced were innumerable, and many compromises to the story were required to successfully adapt it to the medium of film.

Soon after the release of the first movie, controversy began to arise over deviations in the screenplay from Tolkien's own story. Key characters such as Glorfindel and Tom Bombadil were absent, and substantial parts of the story were completely missing. Moreover, characters that were present, such as Elrond, Aragorn, and Gandalf, were substantially altered. The release of The Two Towers took this even further with deviations in character development and major plot elements becoming more significant. Finally, with the release of The Return of the King, more differences appeared and critical plot conclusions were either reduced or removed. The overall effect of the entire movie series was that it told a story that was recognizably that of Tolkien's, but it did so with major thematic and other differences that tended to disappoint his fans. These differences were not, however, of any importance to the movie's target audience— the enormous worldwide movie going public most of whom knew nothing of the story. Despite the differences, The Lord of the Rings motion pictures are beautiful and stunning epic movies that tell a great story in their own right.

The fact that the movies are a great achievement of movie-making is due, in part, to some of the changes that were required for screen adaptation. The most understandable differences in the screenplay from the story are those that were required to contract the duration of the film and keep up its pace. Even with substantial portions of the story excised in the screenplay, the three, extended-edition movies have a combined running time of well over eleven hours, and there is arguably enough material not filmed to make a fourth, extended-length motion picture. Considering the relative unimportance— to general audiences— of the missing material, it was probably a wise decision to not include it. Another important consideration in filming a motion picture is the pace at which the story moves. For example, the Council of Elrond is a lengthy episode in Tolkien's book, The Fellowship of the Ring, in which much historical material and explanations of off-camera events are provided. If this episode had been filmed as written, it probably would have run on over an hour and lost many viewers. Instead, the material was presented in a different way that kept the pace of the movie going along as was required for the medium.

Some differences between the story and the screenplay, however, are less easy to justify. Characters in the screenplay were developed very differently to those in the story, and they were made to do things that seemed contrary to their personalities. Moreover, major differences of theme exist— differences that do not seem to make sense or be entirely necessary for film adaption. For example, the result of the Entmoot in the movie was that the Ents decided not to go to war, but then the writers used what seems to be (in some peoples opinion) a silly and irrational emotional manipulation to get them to do so anyway. It is fair to ask why they could not have just agreed to go to war in the film as they had in the book. Such differences, though unnoticeable to those who had never read the story, tended to disappoint those who had and vitiate their movie going experience. On the other hand, the film's creators stated that the scene had been added to make Merry more than just useless baggage. In that context it succeeded.

Justification of Some Changes
The director and writers of the motion pictures faced some significant challenges in bringing Tolkien's work to the big screen. Not the least of these was the enormous scale of the story. The Lord of the Rings is a very lengthy story that was, itself, derived from a fictional universe of prodigious dimensions. In it, an entirely original world of the author's manufacture forms the backdrop of a story with multiple intelligent races (Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, Ents and Men), their many languages and dialects, a highly developed historical narrative, and a minutely detailed geography of the world that had, itself, changed significantly over time. The result of all this is a level of complexity that is very difficult to apprehend in a screenplay. How does one go about presenting, for example, the historical background of a story that spans an enormous period of history that is outside the scope of the movie to be filmed? The difficulties the writers faced were innumerable, and many compromises to the story were required to successfully adapt it to the medium of film.

Soon after the release of the first movie, controversy began to arise over deviations in the screenplay from Tolkien's own story. Key characters such as Glorfindel and Tom Bombadil were absent, and substantial parts of the story were completely missing. Moreover, characters that were present, such as Elrond, Aragorn, and  Gandalf, were substantially altered. The release of The Two Towers took this even further with deviations in character development and major plot elements becoming more significant. Finally, with the release of The Return of the King, more differences appeared and critical plot conclusions were either reduced or removed. The overall effect of the entire movie series was that it told a story that was recognizably that of Tolkien's, but it did so with major thematic and other differences that tended to disappoint his fans. These differences were not, however, of any importance to the movie's target audience— the enormous worldwide movie going public most of whom knew nothing of the story. Despite the differences, The Lord of the Rings motion pictures are beautiful and stunning epic movies that tell a great story in their own right.

The fact that the movies are a great achievement of movie-making is due, in part, to some of the changes that were required for screen adaptation. The most understandable differences in the screenplay from the story are those that were required to contract the duration of the film and keep up its pace. Even with substantial portions of the story excised in the screenplay, the three, extended-edition movies have a combined running time of well over eleven hours, and there is arguably enough material not filmed to make a fourth, extended-length motion picture. Considering the relative unimportance— to general audiences— of the missing material, it was probably a wise decision to not include it. Another important consideration in filming a motion picture is the pace at which the story moves. For example, the Council of Elrond is a lengthy episode in Tolkien's book, The Fellowship of the Ring, in which much historical material and explanations of off-camera events are provided. If this episode had been filmed as written, it probably would have run on over an hour and lost many viewers. Instead, the material was presented in a different way that kept the pace of the movie going along as was required for the medium.

Some differences between the story and the screenplay, however, are less easy to justify. Characters in the screenplay were developed very differently to those in the story, and they were made to do things that seemed contrary to their personalities. Moreover, major differences of theme exist— differences that do not seem to make sense or be entirely necessary for film adaption.

In the end, the arguments boil down to opinion - which was better, the book or the movie? This wiki is not a place to express opinion, so the reader must decide for themselves.

Arrangement of Story Threads
Tolkien's story was written in such a way that separate threads eventually emerge for the activities of the various characters. At one time, as many as four threads of the story existed. These threads were organized in such a way that multiple chapters could advance a single thread well along before switching to another. This is especially true of The Two Towers and The Return of the King. The first half of The Two Towers carried forward the events of the Fellowship in the lands of Rohan including the Battle of Helm's Deep, and the second half took Frodo through the Emyn Muil on his journey toward Mordor and ending with his imprisonment in the Tower of Cirith Ungol. The first half of The Return of the King then switches back to the West to tell of the war in Gondor through to the challenge of Sauron at the Black Gate by the lords of Gondor. This allows each thread to expand a substantial amount before switching into another thread.

In the movie, the threads are switched much more frequently, and this is probably a necessity of the medium. One could easily forget the plight of one character while spending much time with another. Moreover, the synchronicity of events was much easier to follow with the frequent switching than it would have been had the screenplay been written as the book. This was definitely a case in which the medium dictated the form.

Missing Material
Of a total of sixty-two chapters in the three-volume book set, little to none was filmed from nine of them. These are indicated in red. Another thirty-one chapters had substantial portions left out of the screenplay. These are indicated in blue. The Remaining twenty-two chapters—less than half of the total—had most or all of their material included. These are indicated in green.

Differences of Substance
Difference in Substance describes the change of whole scenes, places and/ or characters. While some of these changes seem trivial they can have a giant effect when all combined together.

Changes in Character
In the movie most of the characters where changed from the book to suit the film or to make the characters more likeable or dis-likeable. Some of these changes included making a truthful character a lair, making a kind character a villain, a determined character falling into doubtfulness or even reducing wise lords into raving lunatics. These were all changes made to characters to humanise them and make them more easily understood by people who had only watched the movie and not read the books.

Gandalf
In the book, Gandalf is described to be a self-possessed and calculating wizard with full trust in the Valar's workings. However in the movie he is seen to be more worried and more panic-stricken which humanises him as a character. Throughout the movie he progresses and becomes more like his description as given in the book which fits the humanisation of him as humans advance after learning from their errors. These changes from panic-stricken to confident occur right after he is sent back by the Valar to accomplish his purpose after defeating the Balrog which fits the idea of total rebirth. But in the film Gandalf is still shown to be weaker than in the book. One example is his defeat at the hands of the Witch-King only to be saved by the Rohirrim while in the books he is shown to ride to the gates of Minas Tirith to confront the Witch-king by himself. This lowers Gandalf's strength as he is said to be a Maia while the Witch-King is essentially just a human ring-bearer.

Elrond
One of the few remaining Noldorin lords in Middle-earth, Elrond, who is over 6,500 years old according to the book, has despaired of all hope and has lost confidence in Men. His attitude is one of capitulation, and his purpose therefore is simply to quit Middle-earth with as many of his people as possible. His opposition to the marriage between his daughter and Aragorn is taken to the extreme of deceit to prevent her from remaining in Middle-earth. It is only when he fears her outright death that he orders Narsil reforged and then delivers it to Aragorn in person. Throughout the screenplay, Elrond is deeply scornful of men. Isildur's fall was, to his mind, the fall of all Men, and he lacks any confidence in any Man or group of Men save the honor of that kindred.

In a sense, Elrond himself has fallen. His fears dominate him until near the end of the screenplay, and his possessiveness of Arwen leads him to perpetrate a deception upon her. Knowing of her intent to forsake the immortal life and wed Aragorn, he deceives her by willfully withholding crucial information from her while convincing her to break fealty and abandon her betrothed. It took the intervention of the Valar to prevent the success of his deceit. In the end, he surrenders to the inevitable, but in this, too, his demeanor is one of capitulation.

Aragorn
A man presented by Tolkien as having a singular destiny for which he is prepared by Elrond and toward which he labours throughout his life, the movie version of Aragorn is, instead, a man of doubts turned inward. His love for Arwen becomes a weight around his neck, almost literally because of the jewel necklace she had given him. He is full of fears and self-doubt, and he is unwilling to embrace the destiny that had been pronounced over him at birth. He is named Estel, that is 'hope', by the Elves, but he is far from being the hope that they are expecting. The reluctant savior might play well in a movie, but it was not the character that Tolkien had written.

Thankfully, and somewhat surprisingly, Aragorn does stay true to Arwen even as she is in the process of forsaking Middle-earth and her oath to him. Aragorn had previously suggested to Arwen that she take advantage of her chance for a better life in the Undying Lands, and he later tells Galadriel that he would have her take the ship to Valinor, which is possibly a reflection of the doubt he suffers in the movie. In the story, Aragorn's destiny drives him as much as his love for Arwen, but in the movie, it seems that he would have Arwen without the kingship if he could.

Aragorn is portrayed as alone in the world without kith or kin, but in the story he has dozens of kindred, at least, among the Dúnedain, and the sons of Elrond were his especially close friends. (Note: Elladan and Elrohir, the sons of Elrond, do not appear in the movie.) In the screenplay, Aragorn takes the Paths of the Dead with only Legolas and Gimli, but in the story they are joined by thirty others including the sons of Elrond and one other named man, Halbarad.

When Aragorn challenges Sauron with the Palantír, far from wresting it to his will as he did in the story, he falls under Sauron's control and is overmastered by him. The jewel of Arwen is destroyed, which signifies the loss of her immortal life, and he is thrown back a defeated man. In the story, his use of the Palantír to reveal himself to Sauron is a brilliant stroke that accomplishes Aragorn's purpose. Sauron is terrified by the sight of the blade that had once defeated him, and his doubts and fears cause him to miscalculate his preparedness for war and launch his offensives prematurely. Unlike in the movies, Aragorn never despairs even when his doubts and fears are at their height.

Aragorn's nobility in the films is markedly reduced—he has no qualms about murdering an emissary in cold blood, for instance.

Frodo
Frodo, who resisted the power of the Ring much longer than most others could, was depicted as succumbing to it much more rapidly and was almost completely overmastered by the time he had reached Ithilien. Of his interrogation by Faramir in the story he could say, "I have told you no lies, and of the truth all I could," while in the screenplay, he told a bald and brazen lie about "the Gangrel creature" that had been seen with him. Even under the strongest influence of the Ring, Frodo never lied in the story.

While it is true that Frodo is eventually so overcome by the power of the Ring that Sam must drive, and eventually carry, him on the Quest, the screenplay causes the loss of his will much more quickly and thoroughly. By the time they reach the top of The Stairs of Cirith Ungol, his wits are so completely scrambled that he does the unthinkable and forsakes Sam on the Quest. This is one of the most unacceptable plot changes to Tolkien fans because the friendship between Frodo and Sam is the solid road on which the Quest is driven. At no time does Frodo turn on Sam in this way in the book.

Sam
Tolkien regarded Sam to be the "chief hero" of the story,[1] and his role was a key one in driving the Quest to completion. The screenplay, however, has Sam actually abandoning his master at a moment of highest danger—a moment where, in the book, came the most tender and poetic scene of the story in which Sméagol was very nearly reformed. The idea that Sam could turn back from the Quest even if so ordered by Frodo is preposterous (in the movie version, Sam was seen walking down the stairs, crying until he accidentally slipped and fell to a cliff where he found the remains of the Lembas Smeagol threw away. Angered, he looked up the stairs). There is no doubt that Sam's love for Frodo would have held him on the road even if he had to follow at a distance. He did not have to do so, however, because Frodo and Sam entered the tunnel of Shelob together in the book, and they fought the terror of Cirith Ungol together—until, of course, Frodo was overcome. Aside from this, Sam was depicted so faithfully that one wonders why the screenwriters felt the need to deviate so drastically at this crucial moment of the story.

Faramir
Faramir is a widely loved character in Tolkien's story. This is due to his wisdom and purity of heart that makes him a great leader and an excellent judge of difficult matters. Despite his love for his brother Boromir, he is his exact opposite. The Ring had no purchase on him, and he understood that it must not come near the White City. He and his men treated Frodo and Sam with courtesy and honor, and even Gollum, when he was captured, received only kindness.

A major departure in the movies is that, rather than assist Frodo and Sam on their quest, Faramir decides to send the Ring back to Minas Tirith, crossing the Anduin and forcing a dubious detour into the journey. However, while tempted by the Ring, he never attempts to claim it for himself. While Boromir tries to take it for personal use, Faramir intends that the Ring would be a gift for his father(although the temptation seems as harsh as it was on Boromir. In the movie version, Faramir, tempted by the Ring, intended to gain personal glory by taking the Ring to Minas Tirith). He also does not react with anger when Frodo refuses to give him the Ring.

The fact that Faramir and his men brutalized Gollum is another major change from his character in the book, and does not really match his character in the movie either. This is somewhat incongruous to the man that we see in the scenes with his brother. While Faramir's taking the Ring to Osgiliath may be explained by the desire of the screenwriters to have Faramir "grow" in his understanding, as well as create suspense, there is no explanation given for the brutality that he exhibits.

It is likely that these scenes were given to us for the development of Gollum in the film. [In an interview, Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh stated that they changed Faramir's character to fit wit hthe overwhelming power of the Ring. In the books he is impervious to the Ring's power, Faramir had the potential to take the all powerful Ring which corrupts all and he didn't. The screenplay writers decided that to corrupt Faramir would fit into the nature of the Ring better.

Denethor
Instead of Tolkien's wise and mighty Lord of Men who had simply been overwhelmed by the lies of Sauron, Denethor is turned into an imbecile and madman. In him, nobility is reduced to premature and artificial senility. It might be argued that this was done so that there would be no ambivalence about Aragorn's takeover, but the degree and tone of these changes borders on the farcical. For example, to plunge from the Embrasure Denethor would have had to run up two levels and entirely across the city, all the while burning to death.

Arwen Evenstar
For some strange reason, the fate of Arwen is tied to the Ring as if its survival, and that of Sauron's, would precipitate her own death. Fears arose after the first movie that she was to be made into a warrior princess due to her replacement of the character Glorfindel, but then she fell in later movies into a weak and failing elf-maiden. While Tolkien's character was strong, bold, and independent in his story, the screenplay made her over into a frail and dependent child who was easily manipulated by a selfish father. Aragorn's love for her was used by Sauron to strike a blow against him and prevent him from mastering the Palantir to his own will.

The Fellowship of the Ring

 * In the prologue, Elrond is shown leading Isildur into the fiery mountain, Mount Doom, and bidding him throw the Ring into the Cracks of Doom. In the book, Elrond and the Elf-lord Círdan standing with Isildur beside their dead counseled him to take the Ring into the mountain and throw it into the Cracks of Doom near at hand, but Isildur refused and took the Ring instead as weregild for the death of his father.
 * In the movie, the mischief of Merry and Pippin in launching Gandalf's best rocket was a fabrication of the screenplay. This did not occur in the book.
 * In the movie, when Bilbo put on the Ring, he just vanished, much to the shock and dismay of the onlookers. In the book, this was to be a little joke of his, of which Gandalf and Frodo were in the know. Gandalf did not much approve of this because, "magic rings were not to be trifled with." Without Bilbo's knowledge, Gandalf had prepared a trick of his own to provide an explanation for his disappearance. At the moment he vanished, Gandalf threw a blinding flash. In addition to scaring the wits out of Bilbo, who had not expected it, this gave the party goers a "culprit", and Gandalf was blamed by many for spiriting Bilbo away.
 * In the movie, the time between Bilbo's departure from the Shire and Frodo's does not seem to have been much more than a year. The only clue that it might have been longer was the amount Bilbo seemed to have aged when Frodo next sees him in Rivendell, but that aging could have been attributable to his no longer possessing the Ring. Many people assume that it was only a few months in the movie, but that wouldn't explain why Frodo arrives in Rivendell in October (like in the book) after Bilbo's birthday in September. It had to have been at least a year; Gandalf probably returned around Bilbo's 112th birthday in the movie. In the book, their respective departures were separated by a period of exactly seventeen years, and Bilbo did age much more in that time that he would have normally as a result of the loss of the Ring.
 * In the movie, Gandalf's journey included only the trip to Minas Tirith. In the book, that journey was taken for the purpose of finding and capturing Gollum—a quest in which Aragorn aided him. It was only when he despaired of doing so that Gandalf remembered the words of Saruman about the writing on the Ring, prompting him to search for the scroll of Isildur, which might make the finding of Gollum unnecessary. After Gandalf forsook the quest and turned toward the White City, Aragorn found Gollum and bestowed him into the keeping of the Wood-elves as had been agreed between him and Gandalf. (Note: Legolas was a Wood-elf.) On his return from Minas Tirith, Gandalf came to the Woodland Realm and interrogated Gollum. It was from this that Gandalf learned how the Ring had been found by Deagol, of the murder of Deagol by Sméagol (who is Gollum), of the turning out of Gollum by his kin, of Gollum's flight into the subterranean caves below the Misty Mountains, and of his account of his loss of the Ring. From the many things that were said and known, Gandalf also inferred the distant relationship between Gollum's people and the hobbits). This journey by Gandalf took a period of about nine years after which time he returned unexpectedly to Hobbiton to make that final "test" to prove what he already knew—that the hobbit's ring was the Ruling Ring.
 * In the movie, Gandalf openly tells Saruman that the Ruling Ring has been found in possession of the hobbits in the Shire. In the book, Gandalf never reveals this information to him. Saruman must deduce it based on information that he obtains from various sources, and he is never able to find out anything in detail about where, exactly, the Ring might be or in whose possession.
 * In the movie at Bree, Strider is shown drawing a sword that is in one piece. In the book, he bore the shards of Narsil that had been broken when Sauron had been defeated at the end of the Second Age.
 * Having not been captured by the Barrow-wight in the movie, where they had obtained their weapons in the book, some means of arming the hobbits had to be devised. This was accomplished by Aragorn suddenly appearing without explanation with four, conveniently hobbit-sized blades that were given them at Amon Sûl (Weathertop).
 * In the book it was Glorfindel not Arwen who came to rescue Strider and the hobbits from the Nazgul.
 * In the movie, the sword Narsil, which is first shown at Rivendell instead of Bree, was in six pieces. In the book, the sword had been broken into two pieces.
 * The uruk Lurtz who mortally wounds Boromir and is killed by Aragorn does not exist in the book.
 * Many stories of what was going on in the world were taken out of the Council of Elrond, which included Legolas telling of Gollum's escape, Gloin telling of the messenger from Mordor, Gandalf revealing Saruman's treachery, and Bilbo and Gandalf telling the history of the Ring. The last two weren't necessary in the film's version of the council because they had already been told earlier in visual format.
 * When the Fellowship stops in the Chamber of Mazarbul, Pippin accidentally allows a dead dwarf to fall into the mines, alerting the orcs to the presence of the Fellowship . In the books, Pippin throws a rock into the mines.
 * When the Fellowship were at the Gates of Moria, Merry and Pippin threw rocks in to the water and they were stopped by Aragorn. In the books, Boromir threw rocks and Frodo stopped him.

Frodo and Sam

 * In the scene at the Black Gate, the movie leaves out Sam's funny little ditty about Oliphaunts.
 * Also at the Black Gate, the movie throws in a near disaster in which Frodo and Sam fall down the side of the hill and are almost discovered by the two Easterlings from the unit marching into Mordor. This did not happen in the book.
 * The words of Faramir over the body of the dead Haradrim soldier in the movie were thoughts in the mind of Sam in the book.
 * The personality of Faramir and of the Rangers of Ithilien was substantially altered in the screenplay. In the book, Faramir is quite unlike his brother, and even before he understood what was Isildur's Bane from his dream, he swore an oath to Frodo to never take it up or even to desire it to save Gondor. In the movie, when he became aware of the enemy's One Ring in Frodo's possession, he decided to take him and Sam to the White City instead of allowing them to pass on their way unhindered. However, unlike his brother, he does not claim the Ring for himself. He initially intends the take the Ring as a gift for Denethor. He also does not react with anger when Frodo refuses to give him the Ring. Moreover, in the book, he and his men were wise, trustworthy, and kind. When they captured Gollum, they treated him with gentleness and kindness. In the movie, Faramir's men beat and tortured Gollum, treating him with malice and cruelty. This was altogether contrary to the nature of men of Gondor.
 * When questioned by Faramir in the book, Frodo said, "I told you no lies, and of the truth all I could." In the movie, Frodo lied to Faramir when he was asked about "the gangrel creature" that had been seen with them.
 * In the movie, Frodo, Sam, and Gollum were brought to Osgiliath on the western shore of Anduin, which they could only reach by openly crossing the river exposing them all, and especially the Ring, to capture. In the book, the hobbits and Gollum were sent on their way from Henneth Annun and were not taken to Osgiliath. After the events at Osgiliath in the screenplay, the three were shown the tunnel, which did not exist in the book, and allowed to take their journey. (In the book, the two parts of the city were joined by a bridge and there was no mention of a tunnel).

Events in the Wes

 * Gandalf's battle with the Balrog is told more or less accurately in the movie, but the tale of it was divided between the prologue and his oral narrative when the three companions met him in Fangorn. In the book, the entire story was told in Fangorn. This is just a difference of sequence. (Note: In the movie, the prologue is depicted as a dream of Frodo's as he lay sleeping on a mountainside in the Emyn Muil).
 * The outcome of the Entmoot in the book was that the Ents chose to go to war, but in the movie, they chose not to. They were later manipulated by Pippin into doing so anyway.
 * The heart-tugging scene of Eothain and Freda fleeing the Westfold and leaving their mother, Morwen, behind does not appear in the book.
 * The scene about Dwarf women is found in the appendix of the books.
 * The scene where Éowyn's discovery of Aragorn's age and heritage does not occur in the book.
 * The screenplay has Théoden sending his people to Helm's Deep for refuge even though that is exactly where he expects the battle to be fought. In the book, he sends them to the equal safety of Dunharrow.
 * In consequence of the above, Éowyn was not at the Hornburg during the battle in the movie. She was at Dunharrow in command of the refugee settlement.
 * The battle between Théoden's force with all of its refugees in tow and the Warg Riders of Isengard did not occur in the book. Théoden's men were not challenged to battle on their journey from Meduseld to the Hornburg.
 * The "loss" of Aragorn over a cliff did not happen in the book because the battle in which it occurred was not fought. As a result, Aragorn was not separated from the king and his men until he voluntarily chose to take the Paths of the Dead as his road to Minas Tirith.
 * In the movie, Háma is killed when the Warg Riders attack. In the book, he is slain at the gate of Helm's Deep.
 * The army of Elves that comes to Helm's Deep in the movie is otherwise occupied in the book. There, they fight a series of battles to defend Lothlórien from an Orc army that invaded from Dol Guldur and then later to conquer Dol Guldur.
 * In the books Eomer is not banished, but instead only imprisoned by Wormtongue and is freed after Wormtongue is overthrown. As a result he is present as Helms Deep and battles alongside Aragorn and the others. It is Erkenbrand, a Rohirrim Commander who shows up alongside Gandalf to lift the siege.

Frodo and Sam

 * At the opening of this movie, the story is told of the finding of the Ruling Ring by Deagol and of his murder by Sméagol, who became Gollum. In the movie, the story was a prologue (all three movies have prologues). In the book, Gandalf told the story to Frodo while they were sitting in the comfort of Frodo's parlour at Bag End. (This is in The Fellowship of the Ring chapter 2, The Shadow of the Past.)
 * One of the most unaccountable changes in the story made by the screenplay is Frodo casting Sam away after Sam offers to carry the One Ring once they had reached the top of the Stairs of Cirith Ungol. This did not happen in the book. Frodo and Sam remained together and did not part until Frodo was taken into the Tower of Cirith Ungol.
 * In the book, Gollum inadvertently destroys the One Ring when he loses his footing and falls into the Cracks of Doom after finally reclaiming his "precious" from Frodo. In the film, Frodo and Gollum struggle for control of the Ring, causing both of them to fall; Frodo grabs the side of the cliff, but Gollum falls into the lava with the Ring. The change was made because the producers felt that the original events were anticlimatic. Initially, they planned to have Frodo push Gollum off the cliff with the last of his willpower, but they rejected that idea because it looked too much like cold-blooded murder.

In the West

 * In the confrontation with Saruman in the movie, Grima kills Saruman, who falls and is impaled on the spiked wheel of one of his machines. Grima is killed by an arrow shot by Legolas. In the book, Saruman survives to nearly the end of the story. He eventually takes up residence in Frodo's own home at Bag End, which had until then been occupied by Lobelia Sackville-Baggins, but after his ruffians are overcome by the hobbits, Saruman is turned out. Upon leaving, he kicked Grima, which pushed Grima's hatred over the top, and he slew Saruman on the threshold of Bag End. Grima was then slain by the hobbits. Because the Battle of Bywater and the Scouring of the Shire did not make it into the films, a means of killing off Saruman and Grima had to be devised, and it was done at Saruman's home at Orthanc instead of Frodo's home at Bag End.
 * The character Beregond was completely left out of the movie.
 * Arwen briefly forsakes her promise to Aragorn and departs Rivendell on the westward journey. In the book, she remains true to him even to the point of making for him a token of hope of his coming victory - a jeweled banner that was to become the standard of his royal house.
 * In the book, upon returning from the confrontation with Saruman, the sons of Elrond, Elladan and Elrohir, along with thirty of the Dúnedain led by Halbarad, met Aragorn and fought beside him as a special elite force for the remainder of the story. This included their being with him, Legolas, and Gimli when they took the Paths of the Dead. On their journey from Rivendell, they had brought with them a banner that had been made for Aragorn by Arwen in hope of his victory. In the movie, there was no such group of men. No sons of Elrond were ever mentioned, and no Dúnedain. The object that was brought from Rivendell was not a flag but the reforged sword of Isildur, and it was brought by Elrond himself.
 * On their journey from their muster at Dunharrow to Minas Tirith, the Rohirrim, in the book, encountered Ghân-buri-Ghân, the leader of the Drúedain. It was from him that Théoden learned that the main road to the White City was held against them by the army of Mordor. The king was also told about a hidden road through the forest that would not only give them a covered approach to the city but would also place them near the walls of the city well inside the rearguard of the Orc army. In the movie, the Rohirrim simply go to Minas Tirith and show up there on the grasslands of the Pelennor Fields. There is no Orc army on the road to avoid, and there are no forest people from which to receive aid.
 * In the book, Aragorn uses the Army of the Dead to take over the Umbar ships, and loads them with allies of Gondor whom he brings to the Battle of Pelennor. In the movie, he brings the Army of the Dead itself, a fact which caused an article on the CNN website to list the battle both among the best in the movies and among the worst (before and after the arrival of the Dead Army respectively).
 * In the movie, the conversation between Eowyn and the Witch King on the Fields of Pelennor is significantly changed from the book's version. The version in the book is one of the best examples of Tolkien's dialogue and many fans were disappointed to see it cut so dramatically.[1]
 * In the movie, Meriadoc Brandybuck is immediately aware that it is Éowyn who takes him up on her horse. The book has him unaware of who she is until the point of her revealing her identity to the Witch-king of Angmar; she goes by the name Dernhelm. The screenwriters felt that this wouldn't work in a movie, that it would make Merry appear foolish not to realize something that would be obvious to the audience.
 * In the movie, Merry fights at the battle at the Black Gates, whereas in the book, he is at the Houses of Healing, recovering from the Battle of the Pelennor Fields.
 * In the book, Prince Imrahil of Dol Amroth comes to aid Minas Tirith during its siege. In the movie, there was no Dol Amroth force.