“I didn’t see anything in the movies that Peter Jackson added.”
Arwen as Wonder Woman in the first? Strider as self-doubting, not wanting to be king? Frodo turned into a whining weakling?
Jackson does action sequences. Character development is beyond him.
All the everlasting *falling* sequences. It was even more pronounced in the Hobbit movies.
Jackson did some things really well. His battle of Helm’s Deep was excellent. His dwarves in the first Hobbit movie were brilliant. (I got drunk with those guys in Austin in 987.) But the fight scenes got more and more video-game.
I understand leaving things out of a movie made from a bunch of really long books. What I don’t like is leaving out content from the source, while adding material that wasn’t in the source. It’s as if a movie of “War and Peace” had scenes of the Battle of New Orleans.
What???? I assume you're talking about the confrontation with the Nazgul? That wasn't about her being "Wonder Woman;" it was about the power of the Elflands to turn back evil.
Strider as self-doubting, not wanting to be king?
I don't know where you got that Aragorn didn't want to be king. Yes, he was self-doubting; he had a crushing legacy to live up to. A legacy that had long been denied him. And it didn't look like he had much of an army behind him to help him reclaim his throne. I will say that the poor casting of that idiot Vigo Mortenson as Aragorn was a mistake, but I don't know that that was Jackson's doing.
Frodo turned into a whining weakling?
Frodo never intended to be a hero. He was a Hobbit, a dreamer, a simple Shireman. Being tasked with arguably the saving of the world -- along with the burden of bearing the Ring -- would probably weaken just about everyone. I don't think Elijah Wood overplayed Frodo's doubts or his humanity.
Jackson does action sequences. Character development is beyond him.
Jackson didn't have to develop any characters. Tolkien did it for him. All he had to do was stay true to the narrative. Which I'm convinced he did -- within cinematic limits.