I forgot to post this when I first found it a week or so ago. It’s a great talk by Tom Shippey about Jackson’s adaptation choices and the results they have on the story. He gives Jackson a lot of credit, most of it deserved (and I admit this being not at all a Peter Jackson fan, for the most part).
However, I think Shippey misses something important in his discussion of the choices that Tolkien made. For example, he complains about Tolkien setting up certain things, such as the army of the Dead, and the Ents’ attack on Isengard, then cuts away only to have someone tell characters about the battle after it’s happened. Granted, this might be a valid criticism of the Isengard scene, but I don’t think you can say that about Aragorn’s adventures on the Paths of the Dead.
Because if Tolkien did show you the whole thing as it was happening, instead of having Gimli tell you the story after the Battle of Pelennor Fields, then he would have ruined the eucatastrophic power of the moment in the battle itself, when Gondor and Rohan sees the Black Ships coming and have a moment of despair, only to realize that the ships are manned by Aragorn and his party.