|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peredhil lover
Valinor
Jun 9 2008, 6:43am
Post #26 of 50
(611 views)
Shortcut
|
would see his wife again in any case, as Celebrían didn't die, but sailed to seek healing in Valinor. I doubt she would have died there, so she certainly waited for him when he arrived.
I do not suffer from LotR obsession - I enjoy every minute of it.
|
|
|
merklynn
Lorien
Jun 9 2008, 8:31pm
Post #27 of 50
(595 views)
Shortcut
|
I'd add that I think movie Aragorn would have gone to aide Gondor and become king eventually with or without Arwen weighing on his conscience. I just think Arwen adds a lot more complexity to his decisions in making the risk and dangers of Sauron more personal for Aragorn and thus the viewer. In addition the Aragorn and Arwen story is about love and mortality and that is a powerful theme. So I could never say no to more of that, and in particular the young Aragorn and his "I'm Elrond, she's my daughter, and you can't date her until you kick Sauron's behind" issue.
No idea where I'm going with any of this. I guess just random thoughts I wanted to share.
|
|
|
bookgirl13
Lorien
Jun 9 2008, 8:50pm
Post #28 of 50
(593 views)
Shortcut
|
I think that his sense of duty and his promise to a dying Boromir would have made him fight for Gondor and men no matter what, as you say. In the book he make mistakes with his decisions and his leadership skills; but he never stops wanting the throne of his forefathers. But in the film they emphasised his uncertainty, his distrust of the strength of the race of men, which was a significant change from the book. This gave a increased role for the film-Arwen to continue having faith in him and reminding him that he is Isildur's heir not Isildur himself. In that sense she would be vital in any story that focuses on Aragorn's journey and I would think it wrong if she was not included in the films. By the time of the LotR, they had known each other for 67 years, and been betrothed for 38 years.
|
|
|
PWOKristy
Bree
Jun 9 2008, 9:26pm
Post #29 of 50
(613 views)
Shortcut
|
That is sexist, to not want Arwen in this movie and/or its sequel. Women have as much right to see movies as men do, to watch these upcoming movies. Women are not "just for eye candy", as much as stupid guys are for women. Women have to be in these upcoming movies. Eowyn did kill the Witch King, not "Merry". And Arwen is not "boring".
There will be 2 movies and 2 awesome Epic Battles, in each of them! And I am not a bad guy. But I do like some of the Uruk-hai and Orcs.
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Jun 9 2008, 9:43pm
Post #30 of 50
(606 views)
Shortcut
|
Liv Tyler is the perfect Elf. She's the only actor who knows what they're all about. In fact, when they film The Hobbit, I hope they dump grumpy Hugo Weaving and assign all of Mr. Elrond Smith's lines to Arwen. It'd make a much better film.
And yeah, maybe the prequel can explain the whole puzzling "Gilraen is dying" plotline thet Tolkien was so sketchy with.
******************************************
The audacious proposal stirred his heart. And the stirring became a song, and it mingled with the songs of Gil-galad and Celebrian, and with those of Feanor and Fingon. The song-weaving created a larger song, and then another, until suddenly it was as if a long forgotten memory woke and for one breathtaking moment the Music of the Ainur revealed itself in all glory. He opened his lips to sing and share this song. Then he realized that the others would not understand. Not even Mithrandir given his current state of mind. So he smiled and simply said "A diversion.”
|
|
|
carrioncrow
Lorien
Jun 10 2008, 12:21am
Post #31 of 50
(571 views)
Shortcut
|
I'm not even to get into the whole implication of Tolkien's female dwarves running gag....an the legitimate possibilities there offered...but a core aspect of the Hobbit is the idea that Thorin's folk in exile are failing as a society...they've lost their mojo - so to speak and the Quest of Erebor is a long shot attempt at redemption for their whole people...depending on how exactly the story is expanded it could introduce a fuller glimpse of the society of dwarves. either the events before the events of the Hobbit or after the rewstoration of Erebor
|
|
|
Silverlode
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Jun 10 2008, 12:42am
Post #32 of 50
(605 views)
Shortcut
|
Let's not overreact here. The original post is not anti-Arwen because she is female, it is about her role in the story and how one person would like to see it dealt with. This is not about women not seeing the movies, or not liking the movies, and the men in the cast are considered "eye candy" just as much as the women around here - probably more. Women are in the majority here on the TORN boards, and have been ever since FOTR came out, so most people here are well aware that LOTR transcends stereotypical gender preferences, though we may joke about them.
All discussion of Film 2 is purely speculative at this point, and everyone wants to see different things in it. You are free to want to see Arwen in the movies, and others are free not to want to. It's preference, not prejudice, that is at issue here, so let's keep this debate friendly. Thanks!
[Note: Your post shows up as a reply to the root post, so I am assuming that is the one you are replying to. If not, you need to make sure you click the reply link next to the message you intend to reply to. If you have any questions/problems about technical issues or board policy, feel free to PM me.  ]
Silverlode
"Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention. They have become like the things which once attracted us by their glitter, or their colour, or their shape, and we laid hands on them, and then locked them in our hoard, acquired them, and acquiring ceased to look at them.
Creative fantasy, because it is mainly trying to do something else [make something new], may open your hoard and let all the locked things fly away like cage-birds. The gems all turn into flowers or flames, and you will be warned that all you had (or knew) was dangerous and potent, not really effectively chained, free and wild; no more yours than they were you." -On Fairy Stories
(This post was edited by Silverlode on Jun 10 2008, 12:58am)
|
|
|
AlatarVinyamar
Lorien
Jun 10 2008, 11:02am
Post #33 of 50
(574 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well that clears that up. Now about those wings...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Eowyn did kill the Witch King, not "Merry".
Really? Cool. Thanks for the info. Now we can stop all that silly squabbling about Merry's sword, the fact that "No other blade, not though mightier hands had wielded it, would have dealt that foe a wound so bitter, cleaving the undead flesh, breaking the spell that knit his unseen sinews to his will."
But glad you cleared it up for us. ;)
|
|
|
squire
Half-elven
Jun 10 2008, 12:24pm
Post #34 of 50
(566 views)
Shortcut
|
You mean Merry did kill the Witch King? Eowyn's sword thrust through his invisible head had nothing to do with his immediate subsequent collapse into nothingness and impotence?
I thought Merry's blade for all its power, only cut the wraith's leg and crippled him to give Eowyn time to recover her balance and an opening to take advantage of. As the text you quote says, his blade was special. But that seems as much to explain how a semi-conscious little hobbit could cripple a Nazgul as it does to suggest that no other blade, wielded by no other being, could do the WK any greater damage.
And although Tolkien is indulging himself by having both a hobbit and a woman assault the WK in fulfillment of the ancient prophecy, the scene as written seems to give Eowyn primary credit for being the "no man" by whose hand the demon falls. Merry's role, it is implied, is later forgotten by the bards, but Eowyn at least gives him full credit for his assist.
squire online:
RR Discussions: The Valaquenta, A Shortcut to Mushrooms, and Of Herbs and Stewed Rabbit
Lights! Action! Discuss on the Movie board!: 'A Journey in the Dark'. and 'Designing The Two Towers'.
Footeramas: The 3rd TORn Reading Room LotR Discussion; and "Tolkien would have LOVED it!"
squiretalk introduces the J.R.R. Tolkien Encyclopedia: A Reader's Diary
|
|
|
AlatarVinyamar
Lorien
Jun 10 2008, 1:56pm
Post #35 of 50
(554 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Its an old argument and a long one on either side...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
The general thrust is this. According to the quote above, Eowyn could not have killed the Witch King. Her sword simply would not have done any damage. Only by breaking the spell that "knit his sinew to his will" was Merry's sword able to damage the Witch King. Now, the counter argument is that once the spell was broken Eowyn was able to deliver the killing stroke, but really there's no way to tell for sure. Thats certainly my reading of it. However, its certainly not a cut and dried case of "Eowyn killed him, not Merry". Which is what I was poking a little gentle fun at. 
|
|
|
Marionette
Rohan
Jun 10 2008, 4:39pm
Post #36 of 50
(540 views)
Shortcut
|
I am agree in all that I hope this time it will be different.
And No more Arwen!!!
(Though, I think she can appear, just like Legolas, but only as a complement, if they are NOT the center of the story and takes too much time! )
We already have enough Arwen-Aragorn stuff int he trilogy. I know many of them were taken from the LOTR appendices, and the ending of the third book, but it was too overrated and definitely it downplayed and overshadowed most of the other.
This time they should focus on other interesting facts around this story.
"Dear friend good bye, no tears in my eyes. So sad it ends, as it began"
|
|
|
merklynn
Lorien
Jun 10 2008, 6:35pm
Post #37 of 50
(547 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Maybe Merry is actually a female?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Look, I think the prophecy of no man would kill the Witch King, meant woman. If you are interpreting man as Tolkien's race of Man, then is it capitalized? It not, then the Witch King was destined to be slain by a woman and she delivered the blow that felled him. Merry may have gravely wounded his link to Sauron or whatever, but its talking about who he was to be slain by. Eowyn did it. With the sword. In the middle of the fields of Pelennor.
(This post was edited by merklynn on Jun 10 2008, 6:37pm)
|
|
|
Finduilas101
Rivendell
Jun 10 2008, 6:57pm
Post #38 of 50
(546 views)
Shortcut
|
Eowyn was supposed to be the main strong female character in LOTR, not Arwen. In the books, Arwen is NOT a major character. She's there a lot, but she doesn't actually DO much. The writers stuck her into LOTR way too much and took out other important characters that do more significant things that she did. Now they've ruined part of the story line for F2, because if they stick the whole Aragorn/Arwen story in there like they were SUPPOSED to, it will just be redundant.
"I like cooking, but I like other people cooking more." -David Wenham
"I think being different, going against the grain of society, is the greatest thing in the world." -Elijah Wood.
|
|
|
AlatarVinyamar
Lorien
Jun 10 2008, 7:05pm
Post #39 of 50
(525 views)
Shortcut
|
Alatar carefully opens the sealed envelope to reveal...
Professor Plum. With the Sword. In the Middle of the fields of Pelennor.
And you were sooo close!
|
|
|
merklynn
Lorien
Jun 10 2008, 7:12pm
Post #40 of 50
(516 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Drat, I should have known it was really Plum that killed the Witch King! //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
bookgirl13
Lorien
Jun 10 2008, 8:31pm
Post #41 of 50
(528 views)
Shortcut
|
|
But having built Arwen up . . .
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
. . . in the LotR films then really they cannot just relegate her to a brief appearance in F2 if the focus is going to be on Aragorn. Both PJ and del Toro have said that they want to be faithful to the film canon, therefore the importance of Arwen that has been established in those films cannot be ignored or significantly diminished.
|
|
|
Jettorex
Lorien
Jun 10 2008, 9:04pm
Post #42 of 50
(520 views)
Shortcut
|
Because:
Liv Tyler is Arwen!!
More Elves the better
No females in The Hobbitt and only a couple possibilities in F2.
F2 will probably be alot about the beginning of Aragorn's story and she is a part of Aragorn's story.
Love story aspect gives another dimension to the movie.
Arwen adds more of the magical/otherworldly feel to the movie.
Love, Truth, Honor, Adventure
|
|
|
Starling
Half-elven
Jun 11 2008, 6:11am
Post #43 of 50
(495 views)
Shortcut
|
|
No, no, it was Mrs White, in the kitchen, with the candlestick //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
PWOKristy
Bree
Jun 12 2008, 8:23pm
Post #44 of 50
(494 views)
Shortcut
|
Whatever. Don't make fun of me. I'm on the women's side of this. Anyways more women parts, in the 2 upcoming movies! And I'm rooting for Eowyn and Arwen, in the upcoming movies.
There will be 2 movies and 2 awesome Epic Battles, in each of them! And I am not a bad guy. But I do like some of the Uruk-hai and Orcs.
|
|
|
mwirkk
Rohan
Jun 13 2008, 8:07am
Post #45 of 50
(476 views)
Shortcut
|
[Note: this is a doubled-up message, in repponse to both "Oi" msg# 106281, and "Oi" msg#107106]
Eowyn:
She was poorly done in the books (sorry Prof.Tolkien, but it's true), and she was little better in the movies. (I recognize and own up to the fact that that is merely my own opinion; anyway...) No sense belabouring it by inventing something out of the blue to pad F2. They've already got the (desirable?) dilema on their hands of having too much material to choose from. I just wouldn't see the sense in inventing more. :(
Arwen:
I think it would be a VERY good thing to have Arwen in F2 because the three unions of Elves and Men (that is, Mankind, but it does always happen to be that the Men are male and the Elves female) are a lynchpin in the mythology of Middle-earth. For Tolkien, being devoutly Catholic, Three would have had signifcance to him, I believe (but without some research I can't say off the top of my head that that was intentional). The material is there, even if much of it is between the lines. Anyway, to comment on a point in the latter paragraph in the root post, it wasn't the Ring that was causing her decline but her sarrow -- the Ring was only a catalyst to that affect. Anywayz, I have a question: why not more/new she-elves? Where are they? That's what *I* want to see. :)
*ist-ism:
Anyway, be careful when you start slinging around the "*ist" arrows. Step back and take a look at your own words. It could be said to be ___ist to require an original work of art to be modified to placate a particular segment of some potential audience because someone comes along, plants their flag in it and declares they have a "right" to it. No one has a right to it (legal, moral or ethical) except those who create it. It's your privilage to be allowed to see it and what rights you have is mastery over your own free will and the decision whether or not to take advantage of such a privilage. The day someone dictates what must be included in a work of art such as The Hobbit is the day I get 100% into CT's camp and hope that he not only wins every thing he could ever possibly want from the courts, but also that the possibility of it ever being seen on film is gone forever, if that's what it would take to protect it. That's not what I hope or want though, of course. But that's the mandate that CT lives by, to protect the integrity of his father's literary heritage, and I have to sympathize with that. Why would anyone want to risk that?
The Witch-King:
For someone to say that Eowyn kills the WK and Merry is either merely a diversion, or even inconsequential, is to admit to either a) a revealing of a complete lack of comprehension and understanding of the material in the books, or b) that they have only seen the movie and never read the books. The Blades of the Barrow Downs, which Merry carries as a shortsword, is absolutely crucial to the breaking of Spell that hold the Nazgul in touch with the mortal world. It isn't shown explicitly in the movies, and the Barrow Downs scene was skipped, but instead the blades are presented to the hobbits by Strider on Weathertop. It could be rationalized that they are the same blades, even if arriving by way of a different route. As per the legend that the WK could be killed by No Mortal Man, it must be remembered that while Eowyn is a woman, not a man (lower-case "m"), and while Merry is a male, a man, he is also a Hobbit and not a Man (upper-case "M"). But perhaps more importantly, we are dealing with prophesy. And prophesy is notoriously ambiguous. It is probably wrong to try to disambiguate this, to argue one way or another which was more instrumental in the task. They were BOTH required. I've heard argument that man is singular, otherwise it would have been men. Well, you have one man and one non-man, and one Man and one non-Man. But no way can they be made to be either "men" or "Men". Anyway, if Merry hadn't stabbed WK with *that* dagger, Eowyn would have been destroyed utterly, she would have been asbolutely without a chance. And Merry could not finish the WK off himself as he was left in no condition to continue, so it was up to Eowyn (who was yet still up to the task) to finish the job. I think, as in the most cynical view of prophetic tradition, this was left to be an unanswered, or even unanswerable, question ... I even like to think it was purposely designed to be so, and I picture JRR leaning back in his chair, tugging on his pipe and chuckling to himself about it. :) People like to think there are answers to be found in prophesy. But most people misunderstand them and end up asking the wrong questions. They'll ask things like How and When and Why, when all along all it can say is What and little else.
I feel like there was something else I was going to briefly touch on, but Igolly gee whiz I can't seem to recall what it was now. Oh well...
Hmmm. Did I just say all that? Ahh-eeesh!
I mean no offense to anyone and I apologize if such is the case. I hope it's understood comments are not meant to be personal.
Well, like Lancelot says trying to apologize at Swamp Castle in MPatHG: "Sorry... sorry... just got carried away there for a moment..." ;)
The Black Knight Always Triumphs!!
-mwirkk :)
(This post was edited by mwirkk on Jun 13 2008, 8:16am)
|
|
|
mwirkk
Rohan
Jun 13 2008, 8:13am
Post #46 of 50
(461 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I hearby declare The, Woodyend, the Smartest Person in the Room! :)
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It must be true, because you seem to agree with so much I have been saying for years!
I'll bet you didn't know that, huh?!! ;P
The Black Knight Always Triumphs!!
-mwirkk :)
|
|
|
xy
Rohan
Jun 13 2008, 11:38am
Post #47 of 50
(457 views)
Shortcut
|
I think they will definitely use Arwen-Aragorn in the film 2. That was one of the changes (unlike messing with Faramir, Gimli, Scouring of the Shire and Saruman...) I did not mind in LOTR - apart from scenes like Arwen carrying Frodo or Aragorn falling over the cliff.
|
|
|
Annael
Elvenhome
Jun 13 2008, 3:41pm
Post #48 of 50
(441 views)
Shortcut
|
if you stick around here you will find that people often go off on joking tangents, especially over issues that we have debated a gazillion times already here (and the was-it-Eowyn or was-it-Merry question is one of those). It's not directed at you - you just opened Pandora's Box there.
Me, I like the idea that Eowyn and Merry each couldn't have done it without the other. Cooperation between the races and the sexes, isn't that the ideal?
The most that we can do for one another
Is let our blunders and our blind mischances
Argue a certain brusque abrupt compassion
- Adrienne Rich
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
NARF and member of Deplorable Cultus since 1967
|
|
|
Ruijor
Rohan
Jun 13 2008, 4:05pm
Post #49 of 50
(448 views)
Shortcut
|
Stop bashing Arwen!Without her LOTR would have been a "dick film" if you know what I mean...Se brought balance to the films,since it was pleasant to watch such a beautiful creature amongst so many fell creatures and also she´s the motivation to Aragorn´s actions isn´t she?I saw the films first,therefore I have to state that one of the scenes that made me love FOTR was her first appearence and the all flight to the ford scene... in that moment i gazed...why you might ask?Well because that´s what ticks me off that´s why,just like the scene with Strider in the tavern...I just knew how much I would love this story.Maybe I praise more the romantic side of the tale than the majority I guess...
So with that said,I expect my elf princess to appear in F2 but I agree it should not monopolize the entire movie just half of it...
In melon Undómiel...
(This post was edited by Ruijor on Jun 13 2008, 4:07pm)
|
|
Attachments:
|
Pretty_Arwen.jpg
(22.1 KB)
|
|
|
leo
Rohan
Jun 14 2008, 5:24pm
Post #50 of 50
(423 views)
Shortcut
|
As much as I like her, Eowyn should have no part in these films. If only because, well, she'd be too young for it time-wise, and secondly because it would really take the charm out of her perfomance in LOTR, if it was insinuated that she knew many of the characters (Gandalf, Aragorn) from events before.
|
|
|
|
|
Re.: Oi
[
