The Return of the King: Differences Between the Book and Movie

The last film adaptation of the Lord of the Rings trilogy does a better job of following the book than its predecessor, but not as well as The Fellowship of the Ring.
The first thing you notice is that the timeline is a little different from the books due to the fact that the Frodo/Sam storyline ended in the last film with Faramir setting them free, while the book ends with Shelob's Lair and Frodo's capture by the Orcs. This is an understandable difference, and it's one of the few that can be found in this movie. The movie follows the book very well after that, right up until the Mouth of Sauron comes out of the Black Gate to negotiate with Aragorn and Gandalf. While the Mouth is killed by Aragorn in the movie, they let him go back alive in the book. I will admit that the beheading does have more of a shocking effect on the audience, and does a better job of showing that Aragorn doesn't want to negotiate with Sauron anymore. After that comes the one HUGE difference that fans have been complaining about since the movie was released in 2003, the scouring of the Shire.
I know Peter Jackson wanted to give Frodo a nice fairy-tale return to the quiet green place, but that wasn't Tolkien's objective when he wrote the book. His goal was to have Saruman destroy almost everything Frodo knew to show the reader how far the shadow had reached, and to show that Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin had grown enough to handle things without Gandalf. But before you agree with me and get mad at Peter Jackson, remember that adding that to the movie would easily add another half hour to it, and it was already a pretty long movie. That isn't enough justification for me, though. He could have put it in the extended version or something. In omitting the scouring of the Shire Jackson went against the intent of J.R.R. Tolkien and did his own thing, and I don't like it even though he had good reasons for it.
The relationship between Sam and Rosie is significantly changed from what it was in the book. When Sam arrives at the Shire after a year, Rosie is actually annoyed that he hasn't married her already. This is a big difference from the Sam that was too shy to ask Rosie to dance in the film adaptation of The Fellowship of the Ring. While the movie implies that Sam and Rosie are living in Bag End, it never actually mentions it. The other huge thing that should have been there is that Frodo isn't really affected by what happened to him with the ring after he comes home. In the book you have him getting sick and feeling pain from the knife wound more than two years later.
That last thing is something that wouldn't have cost Jackson much time and could have easily been added in. Other than this though, the changes are justified enough for me to still be very satisfied with the film. We'll see in December how much they change The Hobbit. Until then, goodbye.