Motion To Direct Staff To Send Letter To King: Fill & Download for Free

Honestly, the whole “Gandalf is restricted in the use of his powers” thing, while not wrong, is, I think, often very overblown. Yes, Gandalf, as an angelic being in human form, is acting under some restrictions. But too often this idea seems to be used to explain why he’s not more of a badass wizard who calls down lightning and fire on his enemies. And this is entirely the wrong way of looking at Gandalf.Because regardless of whatever restrictions he might be working under, Gandalf actually displays his power quite often, in a variety of ways — just not in the movies. Beyond that, however, it’s very important to understand that a major theme of Tolkien’s work was that “power” went beyond strength or the ability to shoot fireballs from your fingertips. To Tolkien, knowledge and wisdom were power — arguably the most important kinds of power — as were mercy and pity and hope. When that’s taken into account, Gandalf is extraordinarily powerful, and is showing off his power almost constantly. But people want to see him throw down in a good old fashioned wizard’s duel. He never does this (forget the movies!) but it’s not so much because he can’t as because he does not need to because, through his other powers — particularly his wisdom and his knowledge — he is able to set in motion events that are more powerful than any spell. While that may seem like some sort of cop-out or excuse for Gandalf not showing off his “magical” powers more often, the reality is that it was an important point Tolkien was trying to make. It’s not coincidental that it’s not the big and powerful characters that win the war against Sauron — not the powerful warriors or magical Elves or wizards — but the humble little Hobbits. Tolkien has a message he’s trying to send, and if you keep wondering where all Gandalf’s thunderbolts are, you’re going to miss it completely.But again, besides that, he actually uses his powers fairly often. It is almost certainly the case that he does far less than his semi-divine nature might make possible for him to do if he were free to use the full extent of that power. But he still does an awful lot.Now, first of all, let’s get one thing very clear: FORGET THE MOVIES. Gandalf is a very different character in the movies than he is in the books — the movie version is more doubting, less self-assured (at least until his resurrection as Gandalf the White) and a number of instances of his actually showing off his powers are completely left out of the films. You do not know Tolkien if your only experience with him is the movies. If that’s the case, get thee to a library.So, let’s talk about when Gandalf does show off his powers.In The Hobbit (the book: let me say it again, FORGET THE MOVIES for the purposes of this discussion) Gandalf uses his power for the first time to imitate the voices of the trolls who capture Bilbo and the Dwarves, to confuse them and get them arguing with each other (because Trolls are dumb) so they’ll waste time until the sun comes up and turns them to stone. He was able to make his voice sound like each of the trolls’ voices, in turn.Next, when the Dwarves’ party is caught by Goblins in the cave under the Misty Mountains, Gandalf is the only one who is not captured, because when the Goblins (orcs) try to capture him, he strikes a bunch of them dead with a bright flash like a bolt of lightning.Then, when the Dwarves are escaping from the Misty Mountains, and are pursued by Wargs, Gandalf enchants some pine cones (because they were all he had on hand) and turned them into fire bombs that would set anything they touched on fire with a flame that could not easily be put out; he and the Dwarves then lobbed the pine cones like missiles at the Wargs who had them trapped in a group of pine trees.Now, let’s shift to Lord of the Rings (again, NOT THE MOVIES; the BOOKS).Gandalf engages all 9 of the Nazgul for an entire night. He battles them in some unspecified but clearly magical fashion involving bursts of white light and fire; Aragorn and Frodo are able to see the battle from miles away, though they do not know what it is, and Gandalf later says it had been centuries since such light and flame had been seen on Weathertop. He fights all of the 9 to a draw and then leads four of them away from Weathertop, so only 5 were present to attack Frodo a few nights later. (This is not in the movie.)When the Fellowship is encamped in Hollin near the gates of Moria, and they are attacked by Wargs, Gandalf tosses a tree branch into the air, speaks a few magical words, and the branch, and the entire grove of trees surrounding the Fellowship bursts into flame, as does one of Legolas’s arrows as it plunges into the heart of the leader of the Warg pack. (This is not in the movie.)And oh yeah, then he single-handedly battles a Balrog nonstop for ten days after falling from the Bridge of Khazad-dum, in a battle of such power that lightning and flame smote the sides of the mountain in a battle that Gandalf himself said would have been the subject of many a song if anyone else had been there to see it. In the end he slew the Balrog and cast it down into the mountain, shattering the side of the peak in the process.After his resurrection as Gandalf the White, he is clearly upgraded in power and authority, and is able to free King Theoden from an enchantment placed on him by Saruman through Wormtongue. Then (in a scene that only appears in the Extended Edition movies of the DVD) he, with a simple word, compels Saruman to remain before him against his will, and with another word, snaps his staff in two and casts him from the order of the Istari, and then at last, with another word, compels him to leave.Later, he rescues Faramir and his company of soldiers from the Winged Nazgul, riding out alone on Shadowfax and firing a shaft of white light from his hand that forces them to flee. (Not in the movie.)Oh, and that scene when the Witch-King enters Minas Tirith? In the movie, he’s on a winged steed and he knocks Gandalf the White down and seems about to overpower him. Not so in the book! In the book, the Witch-King is on a horse, and rides through the recently-shattered gate of the city to find Gandalf sitting in his path astride Shadowfax. The Witch-king curses him and mocks him, and Gandalf just sits there, impassive, blocking his path, unafraid and unmovable, until the Witch-king withdraws when the Rohirrim begin their attack.Later, Gandalf confronts Denethor as he prepares to burn himself and Faramir alive on a pyre in the tomb of the Stewards in Minas Tirith. He leaps over a huge pile of burning wood, lightly picks up Faramir, and then leaps down again as though the whole thing took no effort at all.And all of this only represents examples of his most obvious form of power. Gandalf’s true power is, as I said, in his wisdom and knowledge. He later says that he could have defeated the Witch-king and prevented the death of Theoden and injuries to Eowyn and Merry if he had not had to deal with Denethor’s madness. And this is supported by Tolkien in his letters; Gandalf could have defeated the Witch-king, but did not need to because he had already, through his wisdom and compassion, ignited resistance strong enough to defeat him, albeit at high cost:He alone is left to forbid the entrance of the Lord of Nazgûl to Minas Tirith, when the City has been overthrown and its Gates destroyed — and yet so powerful is the whole train of human resistance, that he himself has kindled and organized, that in fact no battle between the two occurs: it passes to other mortal hands.Letters of JRR Tolkien, Letter 156That Gandalf’s powers went beyond magic is addressed directly by Treebeard near the end of Return of the King (in a line that, again, is not in the movie)Then Treebeard praised all their deeds, of which he seems to have full knowledge; and at last he stopped and looked long at Gandalf.“Well, come now!” he said. “You have proved mightiest, and all your labors have gone well.”Return of the King, “Many Partings.”So though Gandalf did not wrestle Sauron from his tower, or destroy the Nazgul with bolts from his staff, he was nevertheless mightiest. Yet his role in bringing about Sauron’s defeat was one of encouragement, wisdom, counsel and guidance. Yet he was “mightiest” through these things.Now, what about those restrictions on his power? I think it’s a mistake to look at that like Gandalf is constantly holding himself back. He is a Maia who has taken on human or human-like form (he appears human but does not really age and cannot die of old age) and as a result he is prone to human temptations and can’t remember everything he knew in his “natural” state back in Valinor. But Tolkien’s concern in establishing “rules” or “limits” that the Istari have to follow seems to mainly be to prevent them from becoming good versions of Sauron. If they were free to appear as beings of majesty and power, then the Elves, Men, Dwarves and Hobbits they encountered would follow them, not because following them was the right thing to do but because they would be in awe or fear of them. They would be able to dominate the wills of others and shape the world according to their own will. The concern here doesn’t seem to be so much violations of the free will of Men and Elves and the rest, as that the Valar had learned that when they tried to solve problems for Elves and Men, they caused more problems than they solved.As Tolkien says in the letter I quoted above:the purpose was precisely to limit and hinder their exhibition of 'power' on the physical plane, and so that they should do what they were primarily sent for: train, advise, instruct, arouse the hearts and minds of those threatened by Sauron to a resistance with their own strengths; and not just to do the job for them. They thus appeared as 'old' sage figures.And again, discussing Gandalf the White:Of course he remains similar in personality and idiosyncrasy, but both his wisdom and power are much greater. When he speaks he commands attention; the old Gandalf could not have dealt so with Théoden, nor with Saruman. He is still under the obligation of concealing his power and of teaching rather than forcing or dominating wills, but where the physical powers of the Enemy are too great for the good will of the opposers to be effective he can act in emergency as an 'angel'So the point was that, as a fully-revealed angelic being, Gandalf (or at the start of their mission, the other wizards, including Saruman) might be expected to lead the resistance to Sauron, and to defeat him by matching power against power. This they were forbidden from doing. Gandalf, in his “raw” form as the Maia Olorin, might not have been as powerful as Sauron, but like all the Maiar and Valar, he’d have the power to influence the very order of the natural world, much as Sauron did (Sauron raised mountain ranges where they suited him, was capable of blasting the earth itself with such devastating power that entire regions like the Brown Lands remained unable to support life thousands of years later, altered the weather to his liking, and seemed able to control a volcano, among other things). Gandalf and the other wizards were not supposed to do that sort of thing, because instead they were to encourage others to do what was right and fight against evil for themselves.And in this, Gandalf proved mightiest.But I’d argue that it’s a mistake to over-interpret this into the idea that Gandalf was constantly acting with one hand tied behind his back, or one hand and a few fingers from the other, and that he could never display power of any kind without breaking the “rules”. He displays considerable power when he needs to — just far less than he’d be capable of had he not taken on a human(ish) form and agreed to forsake any claim of lordship or domination over others. And the restrictions were not so much about overwhelming free will as they were about teaching Men and Dwarves and Elves and the rest to be able to handle problems on their own — just as the Hobbits, at the end of Return of the King, are able to set the Shire to rights and drive out the ruffians and servants of Saruman who had taken it over (as well as Saruman himself.) What’s that? You don’t remember that part? It’s not in the movie. But the point was that Gandalf had helped them learn, by taking them on these adventures, how to solve problems without his, or any other divine agent’s, direct help. As he said to the Hobbits before he turned aside to meet with Tom Bombadil, “This is what you have been trained for!”

This answer will cover some of the background to give some context. I will try to keep it to the point.Declaration of independenceI'm starting from when Finland gained it's independence in 1917 in the turmoil that ensued with Russia exiting World War I. As the empire fell into a full scale civil war, Finland was at the time an autonomous grand duchy of to Russian Empire. The country had been just recently a target of a major assimilation campaign by czarist Russia in an attempt to assimilate the finns into russian culture and language.Seeing how czar had fallen, finnish parties argued about whether to seek independence and if so, how. Eventually the bourgeoise parties won in a vote with their proposal to simply declare independence, whereas social democrats wanted to pursue it in collaboration with Russia's bolshevik government.Independence was declared 4th December 1917.However, since many western countries were supporting the whites in Russia's civil war in their war against the reds, bolsheviks and because many westerners insisted on having an undivided bourgeois (white) Russia, they at first ignored finnish declaration of independence.First recognition of independenceSince none of the western countries recognized the new country, finnish government was forced to seek recognition from the bolshevik government of Russia, whereas the original plan was that the bolsheviks would be more willing to grant independence if western governments had recognized it first.Russia's bolshevik government accepted 31st December 1917 and the decision was fully authorized 4th January 1918, as soon as that was done Sweden and France recognized independent Finland, soon followed by Germany.German connectionBecause of strong pro-german sentiment in Finland US and UK waited out as finns were considering having a monarchy with a german born king. Civil war broke out in Finland and with the assistance of germans whites prevailed.During World War I many finns made a difficult and illegal journey to Germany so they would receive military training. In Germany these volunteers were formed into Königlich Preussisches Jägerbataillon Nr. 27, Royal Prussian 27th Jägerbattalion which also fought on the front against russians.During Finnish Civil War of 1918 the jägers were screened and leaving the socialist minority behind the reminder of them were sent to Finland where they formed the cadre of white army and effectively created to establishment of finnish national army based on prussian military.Mannerheim & Imperial RussiaHowever, the german connection started to cool down with the likes of Mannerheim, acting regent seeking closer ties with UK and France. Mannerheim was also an officer in the imperial Russian Army's cavalry and fought against the germans in WW1.While he served in Russia, he even served in Chevalier Guard, protecting the life of the empress Maria Feodorovna and later emperor Nicholas II.He stayed out of the civil war and despised how it practically turned into slaughter as the losing reds and winning whites practically competed which side could commit more atrocities in an endless cycle of revenge.Nation approaches westAs the civil war ended and plans for monarchy were abandoned the new nation emerged as parliamentary republic, it was able to seek deeper western ties and gained recognition from US and UK in 1919 after first parliamentary elections.Mannerheim despised both communists and nazis. His wife from whom he later divorced after having two children became a nun in England. He was considered to be an admirer of the british culture and he also had deep respect for both finnish and russian people.Overall, things proceeded peacefully and even when much of Europe fell into various dictatorships and totalitarian regimes Finland managed to stay as a democracy and heal it's damaged national integrity by making many improvements to workers' rights that the socialists had demanded. Overall things were getting better. National socialism never became a thing and communist party was banned by law.Finland was the second country in the world to grant full universal suffrage in 1906 after New Zealand that was the first in 1893.World War IIFinland was under heavy pressure from Soviet Union like Baltic States. This was in accordance to Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, a secret treaty between Germany and Soviet Union by which East Europe was divided to "spheres of interests; neither side would intervene in each others sphere of interest". Germany wanted west Poland, giving Soviet Union among others Baltic States, Finland and east Poland.Finland refused Soviet Union's demands, whereas they were able to set up bases in Baltics. From these bases they moved against governments and staged revolutions and simply annexed these countries without a fight.Winter War 1939-1940Since Finland didn't cave in to the political pressuring, soviets started preparations for a full scale invasion. They shot down a civilian passenger plane in 1939 and fired at their own troops with artillery in the 'Mainila Shots' incident. Using that as excuse they accused Finland and invaded without a declaration of war, bombing Helsinki twice during the first day.League of Nations did not buy into soviet story and expelled Soviet Union. Soviet Union set up a puppet government in one of the occupied towns which it recognized as the only "official" Finland. The puppet government also immediately requested military assistance from Soviet Union.All in all Soviet Union was to commit a total of 1 million men against a country with a population of 3.8 million. Finland was flocking with foreign journalists and all across western world the sympathy was with "the tiny democracy fighting against a big totalitarian country". At the time it was the only scene of real fighting in Europe and received major attention. People like Christopher Lee tried to volunteer to help finns but most volunteers were kept at various guard duties far from the frontline. Christopher Lee has been quoted saying that finns saved his life by not letting him fight.Mixed viewsWhile most western countries sent material aid, money for feeding the country and so on. Italy sent Fiat fighters to Finland, or tried to - Germany blocked this aid as a part of Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. Overall the war received almost no coverage in Germany.United States were highly empathetic with finns and even went ahead to change their laws about selling arms to warring countries so that they could sell Brewster F2A fighters for finns, though only 6 planes managed to arrive before the war ended.Finnish Air Forces were equipped with british Bristol Blenheim bombers and UK agreed to sell more for Finland during the war.There were a total of 12,000 volunteers to arrive into Finland, a large part of them from Sweden. Finnish Air Forces operatedFranco-British Intervention PlanWhile the british and french people were highly empathetic to finnish cause, their leaders also saw certain opportunities with potential involvement in the conflict.They set plans in motion to send units into Finland. This action was going to receive popular support but it would also serve certain strategic goals.France had not only been strong supporter of Finland since the war broke out, they also were hoping to set up a new theater in Scandinavia with the idea of taking some of the brunt of war away from France as the memories of World War I devastation upon France were still fresh in memory. They were planning to rearm polish units and send them to northernmost Finland.United Kingdom was worried about Sweden supplying Germany with iron ore since Sweden supplied 40% of Germany's needs. On 11th December Churchill proposed to cabinet that british gain a foothold in Scandinavia without going to war with Soviet Union, they would help finns and be within striking distance of Sweden's iron ore supply.The help was also to rely on free passage through Norway and Sweden, at that time both countries being neutral. It is up to debate whether the 'ulterior motives' behind Franco-British aid were just a rationalization behind an emotional desire to help finns or whether they were just purely cool headed strategic planning. It is probably that they merely saw a chance to accomplish two things at once - hurt Germany while helping finns or help finns and hurt Germany on the side.Winter War endsTowards the end of the war, many countries started drawing a conclusion that Soviet Union's military was second grade or worse. Germany started to secretly approach Finland, despite their earlier stance about honoring their treaty with soviets. Some evidence suggest that germans hinted finnish leadership of a coming war in which finns could reclaim their lost territory. 10% of the population, 10% of the territory and 30% of economic assets would be lost in the war. 422,000 finns in a country of 3.8 million were displaced, without home. Germany would later conquer Norway and as Finland lost their arctic port, Finland was effectively logistically trapped inside Nazi Germany's territory and next to Soviet Union.Stalin was increasingly worried about Franco-British plans - above all he wanted to keep allies out of Scandinavia. He had planned for a communist Scandinavia but that plan was ultimately failing - Sweden was using time bought by finns to prepare themselves in case Finland would fall and Finland didn't fall in 2 weeks as had been expected. Some of the surrounded and destroyed soviet divisions had been carrying a large supply of musical instruments - they were planning to hold a parade in Helsinki.After 105 days of fighting, Stalin accepted a peace which led to loss of territory for finns and establishment of a naval base on finnish territory.In the west people would however remember the valiant struggle for time to come. Winter War also left a permanent mark on the popular culture:Molotov Cocktail. It was widely used and often the only available antitank weapon for finnish troops. It was named after soviet foreign minister Molotov, making mockery of having a drink with him in "constructive spirit".Operation BarbarossaFinns de facto allied with Germany after Winter War. Germans were allowed free passage through northern part of Finland and de facto roughly 50% of finnish territory was given under responsibility of German military while finns concentrated all of their troops in southern Finland.The time that finns allied themselves with Germany was following: Norway and Denmark were occupied by Germany. Baltic States were annexed by Soviet Union. Germany and Soviet Union were on friendly terms and Sweden swore upon non-interference and neutrality. While it was not clearly not at the time but possibly anticipated, Soviet Union did already have plans for occupation of Finland even in the case that Finland was to remain neutral - and if they were to side with germans, then of course there would be war. But from soviet perspective Finland was never going to walk away from World War II so easily.Finns had their military ready when Germany launched Operation Barbarossa, while finns allowed German forces to use northern part of the country, finnish troops did not attack immediately, they waited. Soviet Union considered Finland a belligerent and launched air raids against finnish cities - and then finnish forces joined german attack.Western take on finnish stanceWest had little passion towards Soviet Union, most western countries had in fact helped whites in their battle against bolsheviks and many western countries even sent expeditions as direct military assistance. Soviet Union and communism were largely seen as a threat and since nazi genocide plans were largely unknown to even many nazis at the time and Final Solution was only being geared up at the highest levels of nazi party at the time.So, for the peers at the time nazis did not dramatically differ from other fascists. They were despicable, intolerant and dangerous, but so were the communists. Even though it was not known at the time, Stalin had killed far more of his own people than the nazis. Some peer reviews from the time actually saw it as a 'good thing' that the despicable nazis would attack the abominable communists. Such views were highly cynical and ignored the immense devastation and sheer horrors that the war brought, but they were based on the idea that the two greatest threats to democracy were now going to be stabbing each other and thus become weaker.Still a democracy, not a dictatorshipSince practically all of mainland Europe were in one way or the other involved with nazi Germany, I suppose there was some comfort to western viewers in UK and USA that at least Finland maintained it's democracy, unlike so many allies of Germany where germans actively supported anti-democratic developments.Not out of revenge, just reclaiming what was lostOver the first year of what finns would call Continuation War, depicting finnish take on their part in Operation Barbarossa, many finns simply considered the peace treaty to be more of a ceasefire and this war to be continuation of hostilities.While finns allowed Germany to use northern Finland, Germany was unable to take Murmansk or cut the railroad, thus failing their sole strategic goal there.Finns themselves conquered back lost territories, including the city of Viipuri. After the old border was passed, finns merely captured just enough ground to form an easily defendable perimeter around the old border. Finns did not make further advance to cut Murmansk railroad and they merely set up near Leningrad but didn't actually join the siege and they did not fire artillery upon the city.Leningrad & Road of LifeSince finns did not complete the encirclement of Leningrad, it was possible during winters to use frozen Lake Ladoga to supply the city. Finns took no action towards cutting this line, even though it would have been relatively easy to use bombers and artillery to break the ice and cause heavy casualties to the convoys.Not really a part of BarbarossaWhy? Mannerheim had spent a huge part of his life stationed in Chevalier Guard in St. Petersburg, now known as Leningrad. He absolutely loved the beautiful old Imperial Capital and he had great respect towards common russians. He was the marshall of finnish armed forces and he decided that finns would keep up appearances for germans but not harm the city.Mannerheim was, after all one of the finest products of Russia's imperial army. He had fought against japanese in far east and he had rode Russia from west to east on his spy mission to China 1906-1908. He knew exactly how big Russia was. He knew exactly how hard soldiers russians were.Anyone with any knowledge of finnish army movements could easily see that Finland was not following Hitler's plans. No doubt some of this information reached West. Even the soviet commander of Leningrad noticed that finnish troops did nothing against him, allowing him to move two additional divisions from finnish direction to help fight the germans - and finns did nothing to exploit this either.StalinStalin would not let go of his ultimate vision about spreading communism. Seeing that he had Soviet Union already at war with Finland, he obviously wanted to take the country and bring communism there. Somehow he must have considered it problematic that his allies seemed to be rather sympathetic towards finns. He started to work pressure towards his western allies to declare a war on Finland. Eventually he succeeded in 1941.United Kingdom declares warThe very manner in which Churchill approached Mannerheim is very telling of what Churchill and UK thought about finns:Rarely has a declaration of war been as regretful and friendly. And as suggested in the letter in 1941, finnish troops halted just after crossing the border of 1939. Historically this is also among the rare instances that two democratic countries have ended up in war against each other.Soviet Union was not popular in UK, had the british people known the extent of soviet genocide and atrocities towards countless minorities and their own people, they might have been even more reluctant to ally themselves with soviets. However, they were at war and in desperate need of allies. Therefore there can be found a great understanding between finns who were forced to ally with nazis and british who were forced to ally with soviets.There was only a single act of war during entire World War II between UK and Finland, british did one aerial raid against an insignificant finnish target. Thus they could show their soviet allies that they respected the treaty. Much like finns showed nazis that they were in compliance with the alliance by sitting outside Leningrad and watching supplies flow into the city.Relations between UK and USAI've personally encountered some sources that claim that there were many disagreements between UK and USA. For example, Churchill would have wanted D-Day to take place in southern France so that soviet advance to heart of Europe could be stopped further back. Americans insisted on Normandy. I've also read that some of american leadership were possibly more favorable of the "peasantry soviets" than the "aristocratic british", something to do with american modesty and their conflict towards aristocracy and colonialism since War of Independence, there was possible more common ground with soviets at least on the superficial side.However, had the americans had a clearer picture of what was happening within Soviet Union they might have been more willing to listen to british warnings about soviet motives.US-Finland relationsAfter Pearl Harbor, which by coincidence happened on same day as UK declared war on Finland, US found itself at war against Germany and Japan. Also, US became allied with UK and Soviet Union.Roosevelt recognized that Finland, whom they had helped during Winter War, was now at war against their ally and aligned with an enemy of United States. Since finns did not persecute jews and allowed jews even to serve in their military there was no strong link to nazis beyond the military cooperation which Roosevelt must have realized was more of a matter of circumstances than anything ideological.So, he decided to maintain diplomatic relations with Finland and hoped it would reduce german influence over finns and also act as a sort of deterrence for soviets to show soviets that US still cared about Finland.Through the war, US would call upon Finland to withdraw from the war. The request itself could never be followed by Finland as finns were pocketed by Germany and Soviet Union and by now there were german troops on finnish soil. Finland would have starved without german food supplies, in addition to shortages of fuel and almost of everything. In short, pocketed Finland could not logistically maintain a resistance to german invasion or a soviet one for that matter without german blessing. No food, no ammunition, no fuel. On the other hand, this devil's pact with nazi Germany made things more difficult with Finland's true friends in west who didn't have the reach to do anything to help Finland.However, as the war went on, Finland was heavily pressured by Germany to in various ways take action against US. It resulted in finnish issued travel restrictions against US Legation personnel and eventually US placed their own travel restrictions upon finns and diplomatic relations began to erode.Tehran ConferenceAt Tehran the allies who were now already clearly winning the war drew up many large scale line decisions regarding Turkey etc. While UK and US had for all along simply wanted Finland to just simply withdraw from the war, Stalin tried to sell them the idea that Finland was more deeply aligned with Germany than they believed.Especially the british but also americans defended finnish side and insisted on independent Finland. It was apparently agreed that soviets could launch a huge attack against Finland, an idea that Stalin sold as "means to make Finland withdraw from the war". Soviet Union would gain some land and Finland would remain independent. Stalin never intended to follow up on this given chance, just like with Poland who were to be allowed free elections.Essentially the west allies thought they had agreed that Finland would simply be sort of forced out of the war but allowed to remain independent.Great raids of HelsinkiSoviets conducted three massive raids against Helsinki, flying 2,000 sorties dropping a total of 2,600 tons of bombs. The plan was to raze finnish capital, however, the plan failed due to finnish countermeasures:Matti Porkka's answer to What are the most mind-blowing tricks used during any war?Finns tricked soviets to bomb empty forest and Helsinki was saved.Soviet strategic offensive3 days after D-Day, Invasion of Normandy, soviets launched their own invasion - against Finland. They massed large forces against finns to the point of at various points having up to 200 artillery pieces per kilometer. Soviets had plans for 'brutal military occupation of Finland' and it is possible in historical perspective that finns might have faced the forced mass transportations to Siberia, a policy not uncommonly applied to ethnicities that were considered a security threat or potential "fifth column" element. Likely Finland would have also seen mass colonization by ethnic russians as was the case with Baltic States, with the main exception being that finns were seen as far more troublesome and a greater security risk.At this time United States announced that Finland and it's leaders were german-minded and withdrew their ambassador Procopé.The soviet offensive was impossible to contain and finns conducted a fighting withdrawal, retreating on average 10km per day. There were many problems such as whole frontline units disengaging and withdrawing without orders and also units that came under heavy attack often disintegrated and desertion was commonplace in the units that were demoralized by massive soviet artillery and powerful tank attacks.At this point finnish government contacted soviets and announced they wanted to break their alliance with Germany and withdraw from the war. However, soviets demanded unconditional surrender. Finland would not be allowed to survive, it was to be annexed and be permanently secured with various means.Germans demand 'to bitter end'Germany's foreign minister Ribbentrop (remember him from earlier?) arrived in Finland during this desperate time and demanded finns make a formal alliance and guaranteed that they'd keep fighting without making any separate peace or so. In exchange Germany was to reward finns with antitank weaponry, assault guns and dive bombers, however some historians argue that a large part of the promised material aid was already in Finland or en-route to Finland.Ryti personally guaranteed all that was asked and signed the treaty, acting without proper parliamentary procedure.Eventually finns managed to contain the soviet offensive in a series of defensive victories by utilizing accurate heavy artillery concentrations against soviet attack formations as well as with the help of german issues assault guns and antitank weapons.Finland makes separate peace, fights GermanyAs it dawned to Stalin that there was nowhere along the front he could achieve a breakthrough, as time went by and casualties mounted he began to re-evaluate his priorities. The forces tied up against finns could be better used against Germany in the race for Berlin, their attempt to end the war against Germany as soon as possible, though it turned out that west allies would not race soviets to Berlin but instead allow them to seize the city as well as East Germany.In any case, Stalin dropped the demand for unconditional surrender and allowed finns to make peace along the lines agreed by Stalin with western allies at Tehran. Finnish president Ryti resigned from presidency, clearing the country from any obligation to Germany and finns agreed to conditions.Finns had to demobilize their army while driving the germans out of Finland. Also, finns were to give up previously lost territories and rent a naval base within artillery range of Helsinki to soviets for 50 years. War reparations were 300 million $ (4 billion $ in current money). Finnish leadership was to be tried and sentenced to emprisonment for "criminally entering war with Soviet Union". It is noteworthy that the prosecuted parties were required to be found guilty.Also, finns had to un-ban the communist party and soviets also demanded finns to ban many patriotic organizations that had been instrumental in finnish ability to survive Winter War.Lapland warFinns initially made a what is often referred to "gentlemen's pact" with german troops that there would be no intense fighting and that germans would only be slightly harassed while they conducted an orderly withdrawal.Also, finnish capacity to fight was not great as all the veteran troops were being mobilized and army size was to be shrunk to 42,000 troops, whereas germans had more than 200,000 troops in Lapland, northern Finland. In total finns could only use 75,000 troops to drive germans out.Soviets found out that finns weren't seriously fighting against germans and issued an ultimatum that they would send their troops to "assist" finns. This changed everything on the front and finns started to commit serious offensive and real war against germans. Germans retaliated by destroying everything in Lapland, which caused that decades after the war german tourists would be often greeted in northern Finland by tossing matchsticks at them.Eventually the germans were driven out, they did not try to hold on to territory as they now faced a logistically impossible scenario with their supply routes stretching to Finland through Norway.Operation Stella PolarisAfter the war finns were seriously afraid that soviets would occupy the country. As an act of defiance finns sent signals intelligence records, equipment and staff through Sweden to West Allies. Besides Sweden, USA, UK, France and Japan benefited from the years of work finns had done successfully breaking soviet codes.Operation GladioWhile finns were never integrated with Nato Operation Gladio, finns set up similar stay-behind guerrilla army on their own. Later as Allied Control Commission demanded the officers be accused at court after the weapons caches became known to soviets, the operation's command was moved to Sweden along with Stella Polaris. This way finnish guerrilla warfare and signal intelligence could be ran from Sweden and the resistance would have been coordinated from safety.It is possible that this all was in cooperation with CIA:"in his memoirs, former CIA director William Colby described the setting-up of stay-behind armies in Scandinavian countries, including Finland, with or without the assistance of local governments, to prepare for a Soviet invasion."Operation GladioPost WarUS wanted to include Finland to Marshall Plan, also known as Marshall-aid, but soviets forced Finland to decline the help.Many finnish soldiers and officers traveled to US, in addition to the Operation Stella Polaris. Lauri Törni was one of the most known ones, changing his name to easier pronounced form Larry Thorne, who inspired the movie The Green Berets. Finnish emigrants would also share to US army their knowledge of arctic warfare.Overall Finland struggled hard to maintain good relations with West despite soviet influence and finlandization and managed to make it through the Cold War without taking part in military exercises with soviets, despite continuous heavy pressure. Democracy was also maintained, despite an episode with Kekkonen being president for 26 years, highly undemocratic feature. However, despite being a highly controversial figure, he didn't perform as a soviet lapdog and he managed to keep relations and trade with Nato countries while keeping Finland out of Warsaw Pact while also trading with the East Bloc.There are many estimates by historians that CIA helped fund ideological battle against soviet attempts to support and grow support for communism within Finland. Indeed, soviets were unable to organize communist uprising in Finland.Finland would often consult United States on matters such as when soviets wanted finns to build them a self-propelled deep submersible vehicle that could dive to 6km depth. Finns wanted US approval before moving ahead with the project, which US granted. It was an erroneous decision however, since only a few countries had the technological capacity to manufacture such devices and they thought along the lines "let them try, they'll never make it". When Rauma-Repola Oceanics managed to build two units, US intervened and told finns to stop production and never to build more of them to which finns agreed. These subs had the potential capacity to interfere with the US deep sea listening equipment and it was feared that they could clear attack corridors for soviet nuclear subs.

TL;DR:It's not entirely clear, but probably, yeah.Tolkien thought his work was unfilmable, but did like to see how it would work out if it was adapted on screen. We get some information on his opinion in one of his letters. Tolkien was asked on his opinion on a draft of an adaption of the Lord of the Rings by a man called 'Zimmerman'. As expressed in his letters, he didn't like the draft that was sent to him.Letter 198From a letter to Rayner Unwin19 June 1957[An American film-maker had enquired about the possibility of making a cartoon film of The Lord of the Rings.]As far as I am concerned personally, I should welcome the idea of an animated motion picture, with all the risk of vulgarization; and that quite apart from the glint of money, though on the brink of retirement that is not an unpleasant possibility. I think I should find vulgarization less painful than the sillification achieved by the B.B.C.Tolkien clearly shows that he likes the idea of the story being adapted to a movie screen, or at least as an animated motion picture (but I think he personally would have liked it more if it was live action, not animated).A few months later he sends a new letter, again on the Zimmerman adaption.Letter 207From a letter to Rayner Unwin8 April 1958[Negotiations were proceeding with the American film company. The synopsis of the proposed film of The Lord of the Rings was the work of Morton Grady Zimmerrnan.]Zimmerman – 'Story-Line'Of course, I will get busy on this at once, now that Easter is over, and the Dutch incense is dissipated. Thank you for the copy of the Story-line, which I will go through again. I am entirely ignorant of the process of producing an 'animated picture' from a book, and of the jargon connected with it. Could you let me know exactly what is a 'story-line', and its function in the process? It is not necessary (or advisable) for me to waste time on mere expressions if these are simply directions to picture-producers. But this document, as it stands, is sufficient to give me grave anxiety about the actual dialogue that (I suppose) will be used. I should say Zimmerman, the constructor of this s-l, is quite incapable of excerpting or adapting the spoken words' of the book. He is hasty, insensitive, and impertinent. He does not read books.It seems to me evident that he has skimmed through the L.R. at a great pace, and then constructed his s.l. from partly confused memories, and with the minimum of references back to the original. Thus he gets most of the names wrong in form – not occasionally by casual error but fixedly (always Borimor for Boromir); or he misapplies them: Radagast becomes an Eagle. The introduction of characters and the indications of what they are to say have little or no reference to the book. Bombadil comes in with 'a gentle laugh'! ....I feel very unhappy about the extreme silliness and incompetence of Z and his complete lack of respect for the original (it seems wilfully wrong without discernible technical reasons at nearly every point). But I need, and shall soon need very much indeed, money, and I am conscious of your rights and interests; so that I shall endeavour to restrain myself, and avoid all avoidable offence. I will send you my remarks, particular and general, as soon as I can; and of course nothing will go to Ackerman except through you and with at least your assent.Zimmermans version seems indeed to be a really bad draft and I am surprised anyone would turn Radagast into an Eagle and do so many basic things wrong. Peter Jackson & Company went so far as to expend on Black Speech, Khûzdul, Quenya and Sindarin for the music and conversations. But mr. Zimmerman seems to lack any such enthusiasm for the project (perhaps he was not a fantasy fan).Tolkien is clearly not happy with this approach, but he apparently read the entire thing that was sent to him. That's dedication (or professionalism) from Tolkien's side. So it seems to me as if he liked the idea of LOTR getting adapted to film, as long as it is done properly and stays more or less true to the original.He expands on his opinion a whole lot more in another letter:Letter 210From a letter to Forrest J. Ackerman[Not dated; June 1958][Tolkien's comments on the film 'treatment' of The Lord of the Rings.]I have at last finished my commentary on the Story-line. Its length and detail will, I hope, give evidence of my interest in the matter. Some at least of the things that I have said or suggested may be acceptable, even useful, or at least interesting. The commentary goes along page by page, according to the copy of Mr Zimmerman's work, which was left with me, and which I now return. I earnestly hope that someone will take the trouble to read it.If Z and/or others do so, they may be irritated or aggrieved by the tone of many of my criticisms. If so, I am sorry (though not surprised). But I would ask them to make an effort of imagination sufficient to understand the irritation (and on occasion the resentment) of an author, who finds, increasingly as he proceeds, his work treated as it would seem carelessly in general, in places recklessly, and with no evident signs of any appreciation of what it is all about. ....The canons of narrative an in any medium cannot be wholly different ; and the failure of poor films is often precisely in exaggeration, and in the intrusion of unwarranted matter owing to not perceiving where the core of the original lies. Z .... has intruded a 'fairy castle' and a great many Eagles, not to mention incantations, blue lights, and some irrelevant magic (such as the floating body of Faramir).He has cut the parts of the story upon which its characteristic and peculiar tone principally depends, showing a preference for fights; and he has made no serious attempt to represent the heart of the tale adequately: the journey of the Ringbearers. The last and most important pan of this has, and it is not too strong a word, simply been murdered.[Some extracts from Tolkien's lengthy commentary on the Story Line:]Z is used as an abbreviation for (the writer of) the synopsis. References to this are by page (and line where required); references to the original story are by Volume and page.2. Why should the firework display include flags and hobbits? They are not in the book. 'Flags' of what? I prefer my own choice of fireworks.Gandalf, please, should not 'splutter'. Though he may seem testy at times, has a sense of humour, and adopts a somewhat avuncular attitude to hobbits, he is a person of high and noble authority, and great dignity. The description on p. 239 should never be forgotten.4. Here we meet the first intrusion of the Eagles. I think they are a major mistake of Z, and without warrant. The Eagles are a dangerous 'machine'. I have used them sparingly, and that is the absolute limit of their credibility or usefulness. The alighting of a Great Eagle of the Misty Mountains in the Shire is absurd; it also makes the later capture of G. by Saruman incredible, and spoils the account of his escape. (One of Z's chief faults is his tendency to anticipate scenes or devices used later, thereby flattening the tale out.) Radagast is not an Eagle-name, but a wizard's name; several eagle-names are supplied in the book. These points are to me important. Here I may say that I fail to see why the time-scheme should be deliberately contracted.It is already rather packed in the original, the main action occurring between Sept. 22 and March 25 of the following year. The many impossibilities and absurdities which further hurrying produces might, I suppose, be unobserved by an uncritical viewer; but I do not see why they should be unnecessarily introduced. Time must naturally be left vaguer in a picture than in a book; but I cannot see why definite time-statements, contrary to the book and to probability, should be made.Seasons are carefully regarded in the original. They are pictorial, and should be, and easily could be, made the main means by which the artists indicate time-passage. The main action begins in autumn and passes through winter to a brilliant spring: this is basic to the purport and tone of the tale.The contraction of time and space in 2 destroys that. His arrangements would, for instance, land us in a snowstorm while summer was still in. The Lord of the Rings may be a 'fairy-story', but it takes place in the Northern hemisphere of this earth: miles are miles, days are days, and weather is weather.Contraction of this kind is not the same thing as the necessary reduction or selection of the scenes and events that are to be visually represented.7. The first paragraph misrepresents Tom Bombadil. He is not the owner of the woods; and he would never make any such threat.'Old scamp!' This is a good example of the general tendency that I find in Z to reduce and lower the tone towards that of a more childish fairy-tale. The expression does not agree with the tone of Bombadil's long later talk; and though that is cut, there is no need for its indications to be disregarded.I am sorry, but I think the manner of the introduction of Goldberry is silly, and on a par with 'old scamp'. It also has no warrant in my tale. We are not in 'fairy-land', but in real river-lands in autumn. Goldberry represents the actual seasonal changes in such lands. Personally I think she had far better disappear than make a meaningless appearance.8 line 24. The landlord does not ask Frodo to 'register'!Why should he? There are no police and no government. (Neither do I make him number his rooms.) If details are to be added to and already crowded picture, they should at least fit the world described.9. Leaving the inn at night and running off into the dark is an impossible solution of the difficulties of presentation here (which I can see). It is the last thing that Aragorn would have done. It is based on a misconception of the Black Riders throughout, which I beg Z to reconsider. Their peril is almost entirely due to the unreasoning fear which they inspire (like ghosts).They have no great physical power against the fearless; but what they have, and the fear that they inspire, is enormously increased in darkness. The Witch-king, their leader, is more powerful in all ways than the others; but he must not yet be raised to the stature of Vol. III. There, put in command by Sauron, he is given an added demonic force. But even in the Battle of the Pelennor, the darkness had only just broken. See III 114.10. Rivendell was not 'a shimmering forest'. This is an unhappy anticination of Lórien (which it in no way resembled). It could not be seen from Weathertop : it was 200 miles away and hidden in a ravine. I can see no pictorial or story-making gain in needlessly contracting the geography. Strider does not 'Whip out a sword' in the book. Naturally not: his sword was broken. (Its elvish light is another false anticipation of the reforged Anduril. Anticipation is one of Z's chief faults.)Why then make him do so here, in a contest that was explicitly not fought with weapons?11. Aragorn did not 'sing the song of Gil-galad'. Naturally: it was quite inappropriate, since it told of the defeat of the Elven-king by the Enemy. The Black Riders do not scream, but keep a more terrifying silence. Aragorn does not blanch. The riders draw slowly in on foot in darkness, and do not 'spur'. There is no fight. Sam does not 'sink his blade into the Ringwraith's thigh', nor does his thrust save Frodo's life. (If he had, the result would have been much the same as in III 117-20: the Wraith would have fallen down and the sword would have been destroyed.)Why has my account been entirely rewritten here, with disregard for the rest of the tale? I can see that there are certain difficulties in representing a dark scene; but they are not insuperable. A scene of gloom lit by a small red fire, with the Wraiths slowly approaching as darker shadows – until the moment when Frodo puts on the Ring, and the King steps forward revealed – would seem to me far more impressive than yet one more scene of screams and rather meaningless slashings..... I have spent some time on this passage, as an example of what I find too frequent to give me 'pleasure or satisfaction': deliberate alteration of the story, in fact and significance, without any practical or artistic object (that I can see); and of the flattening effect that assimilation of one incident to another must have.15. Time is again contracted and hurried, with the effect of reducing the importance of the Quest. Gandalf does not say they will leave as soon as they can pack! Two months elapse. There is no need to say anything with a time-purport. The lapse of time should be indicated, if by no morethan the change to winter in the scenery and trees. At the bottom of the page, the Eagles are again introduced. I feel this to be a wholly unacceptable tampering with the tale. 'Nine Walkers' and they immediately go up in the air!The intrusion achieves nothing but incredibility, and the staling of the device of the Eagles when at lastthey are really needed. It is well within the powers of pictures to suggest, relatively briefly, a long and arduous journey, in secrecy, on foot, with the three ominous mountains getting nearer. Z does not seem much interested in seasons or scenery, though from what I saw I should say that in the representation of these the chief virtue and attraction of the film is likely to be found. But would Z think that he had improved the effect of a film of, say, the ascent of Everest by introducing helicopters to take the climbers half way up (in defiance of probability)? It would be far better to cut the Snow-storm and the Wolves than to make a farce of the arduous journey.19. Why does Z put beaks and feathers on Orcs!? (Orcs is not a form of Auks.) The Orcs are definitely stated to be corruptions of the 'human' form seen in Elves and Men. They are (or were) squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes: in fact degraded and repulsive versions of the (to Europeans) least lovely Mongol-type.[this is a somewhat controversial statement, to describe the Orcs as some sort of rotten versions of Mongolians, and it is open to debate as to what this means]20. The Balrog never speaks or makes any vocal sound at all. Above all he does not laugh or sneer. .... Z may think that he knows more about Balrogs than I do, but he cannot expect me to agree with him.21 ff. 'A splendid sight. It is the home of Galadriel. . . an Elvenqueen.' (She is not in fact one.) 'Delicate spires and tiny minarets of Elven-color are cleverly woven into a beautiful[ly] designed castle.' I think this deplorable in itself, and in places impertinent. Will Z please pay my text some respect, at least in descriptions that are obviously central to the general tone and style of the book!I will in no circumstances accept this treatment of Lórien, even if Z personally prefers 'tiny' fairies and the gimcrack of conventional modern fairy-tales. The disappearance of the temptation of Galadriel is significant. Practically everything having moral import has vanished from the synopsis.22. Lembas, 'waybread', is called a 'food concentrate'. As I have shown I dislike strongly any pulling of my tale towards the style and feature of 'contes des fees', or French fairy-stories. I dislike equally any pull towards 'scientification', of which this expression is an example. Both modes arealien to my story.We are not exploring the Moon or any other more improbable region. No analysis in any laboratory would discover chemical properties of lembas that made it superior to other cakes of wheat-meal.I only comment on the expression here as an indication of attitude. It is no doubt casual; and nothing of this kind or style will (I hope) escape into the actual dialogue.In the book lembas has two functions. It is a 'machine' or device for making credible the long marches with little provision, in a world in which as I have said 'miles are miles'. But that is relatively unimportant. It also has a much larger significance, of what one might hesitatingly call a 'religious' kind. This becomes later apparent, especially in the chapter 'Mount Doom' (III 2135 and subsequently). I cannot find that Z has made any particular use of lembas even as a device; and the whole of 'Mount Doom' has disappeared in the distorted confusion that Z has made of the ending. As far as I can see lembas might as well disappear altogether.I do earnestly hope that in the assignment of actual speeches to the characters they will be represented as I have presented them: in style and sentiment. I should resent perversion of the characters (and do resent it, so far as it appears in this sketch) even more than the spoiling of the plot and scenery.Parts II & III.I have spent much space on criticizing even details in Part I. It has been easier, because Part I in general respects the line of narrative in the book, and retains some of its original coherence. Pan II exemplifies all the faults of Pan I ; but it is far more unsatisfactory, & still more so Pan III, in more serious respects. It almost seems as if 2, having spent much time and work on Pan I, now found himself short not only of space but of patience to deal with the two more difficult volumes in which the action becomes more fast and complicated. He has in any case elected to treat them in a way that produces a confusion that mounts at last almost to a delirium. .... The narrative now divides into two main branches: 1. Prime Action, the Ringbearers.2. Subsidiary Action, the rest of the Company leading to the 'heroic' matter. It is essential that these two branches should each be treated in coherent sequence. Both to render them intelligible as astory, and because they are totally different in tone and scenery. Jumbling them together entirely destroys these things.31. I deeply regret this handling of the 'Treebeard' chapter, whether necessary or not. I have already suspected Z of not being interested in trees: unfortunate, since the story is so largely concerned with them. But surely what we have here is in any case a quite unintelligible glimpse?What are Ents?31 to 32. We pass now to a dwelling of Men in an 'heroic age'. Z does not seem to appreciate this. I hope the artists do. But he and they have really only to follow what is said, and not alter it to suit their fancy (out of place).In such a time private 'chambers' played no pan. Théoden probably had none, unless he had a sleeping 'bower' in a separate small 'outhouse'. He received guests or emissaries, seated on the dais in his royal hall. This is quite clear in the book; and the scene should be much more effective toillustrate.31 to 32. Why do not Théoden and Gandalf go into the open before the doors, as I have told? Though I have somewhat enriched the culture of the 'heroic' Rohirrim, it did not run to glass windows that could be thrown open ! ! We might be in a hotel. (The 'east windows' of the hall, II 116, 119, were slits under the eaves, unglazed.)Even if the king of such a people had a 'bower', it could not become 'a beehive of bustling activity'!! The bustle takes place outside and in the town. What is showable of it should occur on the wide pavement before the great doors.33. I am afraid that I do not find the glimpse of the 'defence of the Homburg' – this would be a better title, since Helm's Deep, the ravine behind, is not shown – entirely satisfactory. It would, I guess, be a fairly meaningless scene in a picture, stuck in in this way. Actually I myself should be inclined to cut it right out, if it cannot be made more coherent and a more significant part of the story..... If both the Ents and the Hornburg cannot be treated at sufficient length to make sense, then one should go. It should be the Hornburg, which is incidental to the main story; and there would be this additional gain that we are going to have a big battle (of which as much should be made as possible), but battles tend to be too similar: the big one would gain by having no competitor.[the emphasis there is mine. It's clear that Tolkien sees the need for editing, but is not happy if Zimmerman tries to stay true to the book by keeping them in and yet not showing it right]34. Why on earth should Z say that the hobbits 'were munching ridiculously long sandwiches'? Ridiculous indeed. I do not see how any author could be expected to be 'pleased' by such silly alterations. One hobbit was sleeping, the other smoking. The spiral staircase 'weaving' round the Tower [Orthanc] comes from Z's fancy not my tale.I prefer the latter. The tower was 500 feet high. There was a flight of 27 steps leading to the great door; above which was a window and a balcony. Z is altogether too fond of the words hypnosis and hypnotic. Neither genuine hypnosis, nor scienrifictitious variants, occur in my tale. Saruman's voice was not hypnotic but persuasive. Those who listened to him were not in danger of falling into a trance, but of agreeing with his arguments, while fully awake. It was always open to one to reject, by free will and reason, both his voice while speaking and its after-impressions. Saruman corrupted the reasoning powers.Z has cut out the end of the book, including Saruman's proper death. In that case I can see no good reason for making him die. Saruman would never have committed suicide: to cling to life to its basest dregs is the way of the son of person he had become. If Z wants Saruman tidied up (Icannot see why, where so many threads are left loose) Gandalf should say something to this effect: as Saruman collapses under the excommunication: 'Since you will not come out and aid us, here in Orthanc you shall stay till you rot, Saruman. Let the Ents look to it!' Pan III.... is totally unacceptable to me, as a whole and in detail. If it is meant as notes only for a section of something like the pictorial length of I and II, then in the filling out it must be brought into relation with the book, and its gross alterations of that corrected. If it is meant to represent only a kind of short finale, then all I can say is : The Lord of the Rings cannot be garbled like that.To me it seems as if Z. didn't like doing LOTR, but also that he is a poor director. For example, I will echo Tolkiens words and say that I just cannot understand why Z. would want the Eagles to have such a big role in the story. It truly is as if you replace a movie about the ascent of the Mt. Everest with the climbers going halfway up by helicopter (I'm looking at you, Vertical Limit)Where as the actual film adaption that made it (Ralph Bakshi's version and PJ's version) would combine several characters or events into one, or circumventing them by some small invention, Z. seems to really put an unnecesary amount of focus on detail and stuff that just doesn't seem attractive from any point of view.In the end, I think we can all be glad Z.'s version didn't make it and we can all enjoy the perfect animations of Aruman the Red and his big fat staffAnd let's not forget the totally scary balrog!