: On the other hand, having thought this over, Jackson may be right. My justification is this. The scene would be very difficult to portray without making it pathetic. The beauty of the scene lies in Tolkien's writing. On screen, it might just look like a cheap Wagner cliche. This is also a cliche to Macbeth, with the prophesy that no man can kill the Lord of the Nazgul in direct comparison to Macduff not being "born of woman" because he was born by caesarian. According to Shippey, this cliche was intended by Tolkien, who also felt he could make better use of Macbeth's "till great Burnham Wood to Dunsinane shall come against thee", and introduced the Ents, which put Shakespear's men carrying branches to shame. Tolkien never had special liking for Shakespeare, and was trying to do undo some of the wrongs which had been done.

: Sorry for the rant, but the point I am trying to make, is that it's pretty close to impossible to get this message across in a movie. Maybe Jackson is right in not burning his fingers?

I too think the scene in the book is very powerful, and as you say it could be mishandled on film and turn into a Stereotypical set piece of Xena type action. You didn't describe it that way, but I can see how the scene could be used as either high drama or adolescent hack and slash. Worst, I can imagine the non-Tolkien audience snickering at lines like "Begone foul dwimmerlaik" if it isn't delivered in just the right way. I love that line myself, but I can see possible problems. So basically I'd like to see the scene remain, but only if done with care and dignity.