And Bernard Hill.

And Bernard Lee.

I tried looking up an answer and, oh boy, did it lead me down a rabbit hole of people posting ridiculous comments on the internet trying to justify this situation in some way. In the actual tolkien book, Grima is shot by random hobbit archers during the Scouring of the Shire. The main four hobbits come home to find that a new leader has taken control of the shire and turned it into a bleak Hellscape of destroyed forestry, burned and collapsed hobbit houses everywhere, and what Tolkien describes as an archaic orc style coal powered factory, in place of the old hobbit mill. It turns out Saruman is actually the new leader of the shire, who’d been waiting for the hobbits to return home, while desecrating everything the hobbits as a people had built for many generations. The shire had existed for 1418 years when the Scouring took place. When the four hobbits arose a rebellion, they battle against Saruman until Grima stabs him in the back and tries to run. He turns his back, takes a few steps, then gets shot by hobbit archers. It makes sense, seeing as even though he killed Saruman, he was still working for Saruman and personally caused a lot of grief to the hobbits. So in the heat of battle, the random hobbits kill Grima out of adrenaline and rage. , But it makes no sense for Legolas to kill Grima. In the movies, Legolas is 2931 years old at the start of LOTR, so 2932 by the end of it. Legolas has seen nearly 3,000 years of warfare and earthly violence. What reason does he have to react with stress and adrenaline, even in the midst of horrific and fast paced warfare? It’s never explained in the movie, not even in the extended edition does he comment about why he killed Grima. He just kind of did it, even though Legolas fully knew Grima was once a man of Rohan, and was clearly turning against his master. Why did Legolas not keep him alive to maybe see if Grima had more knowledge they could attain?

Like Harrison Ford said In Airforce one, "peace is not just the absence of conflict but the presence of justice".

In the books it was stated that Sarumans Voice was supernatural. Also, there are 2 Istari in this scene, so i dont think communication is that much of a deal.

​@@Montogoronto It's a flaw in the movie then. There's no build-up or anything in the scene that implies they have supernatural voices. But merely a few people talking to each other from a far distance. No wonder the scene was cut out from the movie.. The explanation to something shouldn't be that in the books it's explained that it's such and such. It has to be embedded/explained in the film in some way

@@babakzk it’s kinda established Fotr when Gandalf first arrived at Isengard because Saruman uses his voice. Also at the start this scene you can hear his voice have an effect