Good but should have stayed truer to the book

Rating: 7/10 (26 October 2008)

This is a great film and a massive achievement. Well done to the Jackson Team for bringing Lord of the Rings to the big screen and doing it very well. There was an alteration to the story that upset me but does not seem to bother anyone else I know so for most people in the world this film probably qualifies for an 8, 9 or 10.
Spoiler below
I've read the books (twice) and the content covered in this film includes my favourite moment in the books: During the battle outside the city of Gondor, things are looking very bleak for the good guys. They are holed up in the city, the gate is broken down and Ring Wriath number one starts smack talking with Gandalf. The Riders of Rohan turn up and distract the Ring Wriath King and he goes back to his bird creature - no Orcs get into the city. The riders turn up and do really well but(following the King's death etc which plays out pretty much the same) the new King, King Eomer, realises that they're all still stuffed but resolves to fight on to the death honourably.
THE IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE is this moment, when the battle turns in favour of the good guys. it relates to the UNDEAD people. Aragorn turns up with the ships, having conquered them from the pirates. IN THE BOOK Aragorn had used the undead people from under the Mountain to capture the ships. That is all they do. It is not even established if they are invulnerable or not. Anyway, the ships that arrive at the battle outside Minas Tirith/Gondor are carrying soldiers who were recruited from along the river by Aragorn. Therefore in the book it is Humans and elves and a few dwarfs that risk their lives and finally prevail.
IN THE FILM the ships are still carrying the UNDEAD INVINCIBLE people. They are like a super specialised weaponised virus/nerve gas agent that wipes out all the orcs and saves everyone (though despite this Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli decide to risk their lives anyway - mostly to look cool I think).
Why does this matter? It just takes away a lot of the emotional investment in my opinion. When there are characters fighting for their lives in a desperate battle, one really feels for them in their situation. When they actually win one feels part of the victory - these characters overcame the terrible obstacles and all the suffering etc was worth it. When the undead people win the battle, it just doesn't feel like the good guys really did it. It's like they cheated.
If Aragorn had turned up with special anti Orc Nerve Gas, then the fate of the battle was already determined the moment he had got hold of it. Therefore the emphasis of the story should have centred around the acquisition of this nerve gas. The battle could have raged while Aragorn and co battled ridiculous odds to get the gas, killing Balrogs singlehandedly etc. Then once secured, the transport to the field would have been in the knowledge that so long as they arrived in time everything would be OK. If this were the case, Aragorn would have commandeered a few more riders from Theoden for his quest for nerve gas and the purpose of the other Riders going to the battlefield would have been a delaying tactic (like the subsequent assault upon Mordor by the allies). In both book and film getting help from the dead was like a short side story and relatively little significance seemed to be placed on it. The consequences of this 'little extra help' is out of proportion.
Apologies for this rant on a subject which most people would not even notice existed.
The absence of the reckoning of the Shire - well that was a great part of the book but an acceptable omission. It would have been a great incentive to buy the extended version if it was in there. Unfortunately it was not. And the end did seem to drag on, but then maybe if I had not read the books it would have seemed like an appropriate dragging on.