Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
Gandalf, Radagast (the Istari in general) and Galadriel, going forward. Hoping Phillipa Boyens et al remember that The Lady is sacred, but the Wizards Divine.
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Feb 20 2013, 2:54pm

Post #1 of 29 (961 views)
Shortcut
Gandalf, Radagast (the Istari in general) and Galadriel, going forward. Hoping Phillipa Boyens et al remember that The Lady is sacred, but the Wizards Divine. Can't Post

Yes, it is still on my mind. Never left it really, and the notion of Radagast in the presence of The Lady alongside Gandalf stirred the thought anew.

As I mentioned before, there were places in the first film where Galadriel's relating to Gandalf seemed to tilted. In some places it was perfect and moving, but in others he seemed to be taking his cues from her at best, and one sided direction at worst.

This is not some manner of anti-female sentiment on my part. I LOVE Galadriel and I have generally loved the way Cate has portrayed her. Ever since she played Elizabeth I thought she was great for the role. I thought she was perfectly portrayed in the Rings films, and her interactions with Frodo, Aragorn, Legolas, Boromir, Gimli and the rest was without flaw. It is proper that all of them should have regarded her as sainted and holy, both powerful and wise beyond their reckoning.

It should not be so with any of the Istari. Of course they should be enchanted by her beauty and respectful of her power and wisdom. . . but none of them, not even Radagast, should be made to seem overwhelmed, overawed, subserviant or out of their depth in her presence. They should take counsel from her, but they should also render counsel to her.

I hope that in the upcoming film Gandalf will be seen giving advice to her as much as taking it. Perhaps, once Sauron's threat is known, she will still be hesitant to strike what might be a costly blow, wondering if the power of The Elves might not be sufficient to withstand Sauron without going forth to assail him directly. Gandalf (in keeping with the existing lore of the films) might warn her against the danger of waiting for Sauron's power to grow, and also remind her of the alliances the Enemy might use. " A dragon in Erebor. . . and in Moria a Demon and former captain of Morgoth, even as was Sauron himself! For all the power of Lord Elrond, can Rivendell withstand the assault of a great dragon? Are even the fences of Galadriel certain to repel the fell might and sorcery of a Balrog of Morgoth, should Sauron manage to rally so dreadful a terror to his cause? All evil things are repairing to his aid, and among them are Dark Powers such as even the High-Elves might fear to face. . ." You know. Something like that, then they consult the Mirror etc. Etc.

I don't expect or desire to see Galadriel courtseying to them. Just a more balanced interaction and mutual reverance. Galadriel is mighty and wonderful, but the film team needs still to remember that she is Galadriel, not Melain, Yavanna, Nienna or Varda.

"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

(This post was edited by AinurOlorin on Feb 20 2013, 2:58pm)


stoutfiles
Rohan


Feb 20 2013, 3:53pm

Post #2 of 29 (495 views)
Shortcut
Too late for that [In reply to] Can't Post

Even Gandalf seems awed by her presence in The Hobbit. I doubt that will change going forward.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Feb 20 2013, 4:04pm

Post #3 of 29 (447 views)
Shortcut
It can be amended, or at least not exacerbated. [In reply to] Can't Post

We will have to see how they handle it, but one would hope they are at least aware of the line they are walking, and proceed with greater delicacy in their portrayl.

In Reply To
Even Gandalf seems awed by her presence in The Hobbit. I doubt that will change going forward.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


JWPlatt
Grey Havens


Feb 20 2013, 4:31pm

Post #4 of 29 (435 views)
Shortcut
Agreed [In reply to] Can't Post

I like all of this.

There's one thing I think you should consider. Istari faculties are apparently limited while manifested in mortal flesh in Middle Earth. So how does an Istari really compare to someone like Galadriel in this state of being? Knowing what the Istari are, should Galariel respond to their true nature, which is of little practical use and unavailable in Middle Earh, or simply to what they are while in Middle Earth? And conversely, Gandalf to Galadriel?


(This post was edited by JWPlatt on Feb 20 2013, 4:39pm)


elevorn
Lorien


Feb 20 2013, 5:18pm

Post #5 of 29 (393 views)
Shortcut
is their power relative... [In reply to] Can't Post

To what form they take. I will not try to argue on behalf of the screen writers as I do not know them. Yet this brings up an interesting question of the Istari in Middle Earth. Are the limited by the flesh of their forms? We know that their power was masked and that they were to be guides and not warriors. But what if the ring were regained by Sauron, would they have then been able to reveal their power and battle with him? If they were allowed such abilities the perhaps that would change how Galadriel would interact with them. Based on the Hobbit book Gandalf has some misteps in the book. He does seem a little unsure and somewhat off at times, but that could just be Biblo's perception of him. In the LOTR we see a much different Gandalf in terms of surity and strength. But what does that mean in terms of how the Istari are in general?

If we look at it in terms that they are limited in power and merely a form of guidance, can we really expect the White Lady of the Noldor to give much heed to the Istari? After all, she left because she had a desire for her own rule in one form or another.

How should we really be dealing with the presupposed might of the Istari? For the sake of discussion lets just leave Gandalf the white out of it for now.

For me I don't think any of the white council is supposed to be over another. They all serve different functions. Gandalf is no lord of lands, Galadriel, Elrond and Cirdan, all have realms to govern. Saruman is the other wildcard here. He is not supposed to have lands, yet he holds Isengard. The whole idea of this council and who is greater is a difficult argument because it is never spelled out just how far the Istari are allowed to go. From what we know, only one really remains true to the task of healing the hurts of Sauron. The other four fail utterly. So really, what is their ability?



"clever hobbits to climb so high!"
Check out my writing www.jdstudios.wordpress.com


MorgolKing
Rivendell

Feb 20 2013, 5:33pm

Post #6 of 29 (362 views)
Shortcut
I agree [In reply to] Can't Post

I hope they refrain from what they started in the Hobbit. The Istari do not bow down to Galardiel (*in the voice of Denethor)


Eleniel
Grey Havens


Feb 20 2013, 6:08pm

Post #7 of 29 (353 views)
Shortcut
Their power was masked, but still accessible... [In reply to] Can't Post

They were only clothed in the bodies of old men...physically they were "real" Men, and felt all the urges, pleasures and fears of flesh and blood. Therefore, in spite of their specific and unambiguous goal, the Wizards were capable of human feelings. They could also feel negative human emotions such as greed, jealousy, and lust for power. The Valar wished them to guide the inhabitants of Middle-earth by persuasion and encouragement, not by force or fear, and they were forbidden from confronting Sauron directly.

Yet their power was not linked entirely to their staffs - Saruman retained the power of his voice over the hearts and wills of men after his staff was broken, and Gandalf also was able to kill the Balrog without the use of his staff. An Istari's strength is in his spirit...their power is beyond that of mere conjurers, and as such should not be subservient to even the greatest of the Eldar.


"Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened."
Victoria Monfort






elevorn
Lorien


Feb 20 2013, 6:12pm

Post #8 of 29 (358 views)
Shortcut
All of your points make sense... [In reply to] Can't Post

Yet why would they not be subservient? Does ones power give them rule? Would Gandalf say such a thing? Surely Saruman would, but then again he had given into his fleshly form and become hungry for power. And since they were forbidden to use their power to confront Sauron directly, would that not make them somewhat subservient? They can guide, but do you have to actually listen?



"clever hobbits to climb so high!"
Check out my writing www.jdstudios.wordpress.com


Michelle Johnston
Rohan


Feb 20 2013, 6:50pm

Post #9 of 29 (345 views)
Shortcut
Divinity wrapped in humbleness [In reply to] Can't Post

This is good stuff and so are the subsequent responces because the Istari represent some thing which is entirely alien in todays world.

Uncloaked in Aman the Maia's relationship with Eru's creation was entirely unambigious.

Their role, which is explained most clearly in unfinished tales, was to act as a catalyist for good actions by the peoples of middle earth by encouragement and persuasion. They were not their to act directly or lead, each spirit had to find a way of relating to the peoples of middle earth in away which best suited this purpose. By the time of the Hobbit Gandalf and Radagast would be seen as kindly elderly gentlemen who could perform tricks few would understand their true purpose Cirdan, Galadriel and Elrond would be among their number. Saruman had clearly established himself as a statesmen like character and even the short interlude at the council suggests someone who could move from statesman like to acquiring there own state.

Galadriel by contrast is a Queen of her people and her wisdom developed over the centuries is invested with the light of the trees her power is political, tangible and uncloaked as is her inner beauty.

Treebeard intereactions with the company at Orthanc is entirely representitive of this view he treats Celeborn and Galadriel with the greatest reverence in "Many Partings". Re reading this section Gandalf's interaction with Galadriel seems to me a seemless extention of that approach she is afforded the greatest external courtesy.

My point is the social and political animal Gandalf is treated in away that I feel entirely comfortable with at the White Council. Her offer to come to his aid fits in with the support she provided for him after his resurrection following his "death" on "Zirik Zagil" spelling maybe off here.

Sarumans words at his final meeting with Galadriel on the road to the shire have I think been instructive in conjuring up the interplay at the White Council .."I do not trust her, she always hated me, and schemed for your (Gandalf's) part.

As my children would say I am cool with what happened at the W.C.

One final observation the Gandalf of the Hobbit book is different, Tolkien had no idea whom he was when he wrote the book the notion of the Istari and their discipleship was 20 years in the future.

I tried to save the shire , and it has been but not for me.


Eleniel
Grey Havens


Feb 20 2013, 7:01pm

Post #10 of 29 (326 views)
Shortcut
subservient... [In reply to] Can't Post

Interesting word...if you take def. 3 below, that Gandalf is serving to promote an end, then yes, it is right. His humbleness and self-effacing nature, is one of the reasons Manwe felt it most appropriate that he should go.

But PJ is in danger of crossing the fine line between that and making him appear to fit the other two definitions...



Subservient Adj. 1. subordinate in capacity or function. 2. Obsequious; servile. 3. Useful as a means or an instrument; serving to promote an end.


"Choosing Trust over Doubt gets me burned once in a while, but I'd rather be singed than hardened."
Victoria Monfort






TFP
Rivendell


Feb 20 2013, 8:21pm

Post #11 of 29 (303 views)
Shortcut
... [In reply to] Can't Post

Non-issue to me.

The frailty and fallibility that goes hand-in-hand with Gandalf's incarnacy [if that's not a word it should be] has a huge lot of charm about it, but so also does the fact that he's [as GTW], "more dangerous than anything you will ever meet, unless you are brought alive before the seat of the Dark Lord", and [as GTG] the guy who Cirdan [crudely speaking a peer of Galadriel] addresses as "master" & immediately picks out as the "greatest in spirit" of the Istari.

They're both great ideas that both deserve a lot of airing. I don't really mind that there's an element of inconsistency about the two [or that there can be if you lay the first element on as thickly as Jackson does].


(This post was edited by TFP on Feb 20 2013, 8:29pm)


Arannir
Valinor

Feb 20 2013, 8:32pm

Post #12 of 29 (291 views)
Shortcut
Agree with this. [In reply to] Can't Post

I saw the WC scene as a side-kick to what happens in the books between Zirakzigil and Fangorn.

That is why I *spoiler* think that the potential "Galadriel carrying Gandalf" scene might work out beautifully if it is handled with dignity for both (and I do not see why it would not).


I will probably never understand why so many fans think Gandalf is portrayed as too weak. He plays such a big role, he saves the day so many times... if anything, those scenes make him more human, in a positive way and establishes that the two of them have a special relationship - which si true in the books too.

He sacrifices so much... goes through so much, for Middle-earth. Although he did not want to go there. I think seeing him getting hurt on the way to fullfill his mission is nothing but great. And as such pictured in the movies so far.


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Feb 20 2013, 10:59pm

Post #13 of 29 (258 views)
Shortcut
Limited but not absent. Their powers were still beyond those of mortal men, even kings, and beyond [In reply to] Can't Post

those of the Silvan and Sindar Elves. They could, in need, reveal some small aspect of themselvs, though their true power was greatly limited by the flesh they had taken so long as they were in it. Still, their powers were only limited to what was possible WITHOUT the need of being a Holy Spirit. Tolkien specifically said it was not sufficient that they should be Eldar of the Highest order like Galadriel and Glorfindel. Middle-Earth already had a remnant of those resisting Sauron. These messengers were specifically Holy, Angelic, Ainur, though they were forbidden to manifest as such. Their power would have been akin to the mightiest of the Eldar in the world, but not beyond (save in an extreme case, or near the end of their mission, e.g. Gandalf The White is clearly stated by Tolkien (and himself) to be the most powerful force in Middle-Earth save Sauron himself.

Yet, Galadriel's reverance of them would not have been based on their current level of power. She would have revered them as Holy Messengeres, even had they come limited to the powers of mortal men, knowing what they were and what they had been. Likely, perhaps, knowing even who they had been, for Olorin had Loved The Elves, Alatar had hunted and been in kinship with Orome (whom the Noldor loved), Aweindel in kinship with Yavanna, and Curumo being mighty among the people and kindred of Aule, whom the Noldor also loved and learned from greatly.

In Reply To
I like all of this.

There's one thing I think you should consider. Istari faculties are apparently limited while manifested in mortal flesh in Middle Earth. So how does an Istari really compare to someone like Galadriel in this state of being? Knowing what the Istari are, should Galariel respond to their true nature, which is of little practical use and unavailable in Middle Earh, or simply to what they are while in Middle Earth? And conversely, Gandalf to Galadriel?


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Feb 20 2013, 11:09pm

Post #14 of 29 (253 views)
Shortcut
Fail utterly is far too strong a turn. [In reply to] Can't Post

Radagast's aid proved essential, and if he was indeed sent by plea of Yavanna, then it seems that in some regards he held true to his mission. Certainly he never became corrupt. Tolkien also states that the might of The East would have been far greater, had Alatar and Pallando not been at least moderately effective in turning significant populations of the East and South away from servitude and alignment with Sauron.

As to Galadriel. .. bear in mind her perception for one thing. She knew what and who they were. Gandalf would not have needed to darken the Flats/Fletes of Lothlorien with his inner power to prove any points. Galadriel would have, not unlike Cirdan though perhaps not with as much foresight, have perceived the mighty spirit within him. Also, though she had followed her uncle in defiance of The Will of The Valar, it is said that she still revered the Ainur greatly, and at this point in time, being so long exiled and so greatly desiring to return, she would have been all the more reverent. Certainly she would not have been inclined to behave haughtily or dismissively towards Ainur, even incranate ones, who were also the Holy Messengers of The Valar.

And we know how she felt about Gandalf. She wanted him to head the council. If she had held them in low regard, she would not have been shy about expressing a desire for leading the council herself.

In Reply To
To what form they take. I will not try to argue on behalf of the screen writers as I do not know them. Yet this brings up an interesting question of the Istari in Middle Earth. Are the limited by the flesh of their forms? We know that their power was masked and that they were to be guides and not warriors. But what if the ring were regained by Sauron, would they have then been able to reveal their power and battle with him? If they were allowed such abilities the perhaps that would change how Galadriel would interact with them. Based on the Hobbit book Gandalf has some misteps in the book. He does seem a little unsure and somewhat off at times, but that could just be Biblo's perception of him. In the LOTR we see a much different Gandalf in terms of surity and strength. But what does that mean in terms of how the Istari are in general?

If we look at it in terms that they are limited in power and merely a form of guidance, can we really expect the White Lady of the Noldor to give much heed to the Istari? After all, she left because she had a desire for her own rule in one form or another.

How should we really be dealing with the presupposed might of the Istari? For the sake of discussion lets just leave Gandalf the white out of it for now.

For me I don't think any of the white council is supposed to be over another. They all serve different functions. Gandalf is no lord of lands, Galadriel, Elrond and Cirdan, all have realms to govern. Saruman is the other wildcard here. He is not supposed to have lands, yet he holds Isengard. The whole idea of this council and who is greater is a difficult argument because it is never spelled out just how far the Istari are allowed to go. From what we know, only one really remains true to the task of healing the hurts of Sauron. The other four fail utterly. So really, what is their ability?


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Feb 20 2013, 11:17pm

Post #15 of 29 (248 views)
Shortcut
I don't think any are suggesting, and certainly I am not, that their should be a complete role reversal, [In reply to] Can't Post

nor that Galadriel should be seen bowing and scraping before The Istari. That would be entirely counter to their purpose. Yet neither she nor any other Elf should seem to be giving any of The Istari their marching orders, nor should she seem like the Oracle of The Divine to whom they turn for counsel, while she by comparison seems to have little need for their advice.

In Reply To
Yet why would they not be subservient? Does ones power give them rule? Would Gandalf say such a thing? Surely Saruman would, but then again he had given into his fleshly form and become hungry for power. And since they were forbidden to use their power to confront Sauron directly, would that not make them somewhat subservient? They can guide, but do you have to actually listen?


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Feb 20 2013, 11:20pm

Post #16 of 29 (254 views)
Shortcut
Exactly. [In reply to] Can't Post

Precisely my concern, and I could hardly have said it better.

Also, Michelle, while Tolkien may not have had all the pieces to the puzzle at the time of The Hobbit, this adaptation is of The Hobbit in context with and with full knowledge of the larger Legendarium. . . wlese, Galadriel would not even appear in it, after all.

In Reply To
Interesting word...if you take def. 3 below, that Gandalf is serving to promote an end, then yes, it is right. His humbleness and self-effacing nature, is one of the reasons Manwe felt it most appropriate that he should go.

But PJ is in danger of crossing the fine line between that and making him appear to fit the other two definitions...



Subservient Adj. 1. subordinate in capacity or function. 2. Obsequious; servile. 3. Useful as a means or an instrument; serving to promote an end.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Feb 20 2013, 11:39pm

Post #17 of 29 (250 views)
Shortcut
In this one instance, it is not so much a matterof him appearing weak, as of the roles and relationships being misconstrued. [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes, I am one who would like al his scenes of magic and battles in the books to appear on film as they are in the novels. But this isn't about displays of power. Even if he never did a single act of magic, he should still be seen a one from whom even Galadriel would take advice just as often as give it. There should never be any room for misconception in the mind of a lay viewer that he might be an agent or hierarchal subordinate of Galadriel. It has to be remembered that the majority of people viewing these movies know less of The Ainur and their Holy Nature than Feanor knew of the might of Angband upon his landing on the shores of Belariand. Everything they know about Wizards and Elves, for many, comes from the films. Another poster already said her husband was not sure whether Galadriel was one of The Wizards or not. High profile critics have commented on Gandalf being surrounded by "his superiours" at The Council, even though only one being there could properly be considered such. The notion that Gandalf functions as a lesser aide or supplicant of Galadriel is simply an incorrect one.

In Reply To
I saw the WC scene as a side-kick to what happens in the books between Zirakzigil and Fangorn.

That is why I *spoiler* think that the potential "Galadriel carrying Gandalf" scene might work out beautifully if it is handled with dignity for both (and I do not see why it would not).


I will probably never understand why so many fans think Gandalf is portrayed as too weak. He plays such a big role, he saves the day so many times... if anything, those scenes make him more human, in a positive way and establishes that the two of them have a special relationship - which si true in the books too.

He sacrifices so much... goes through so much, for Middle-earth. Although he did not want to go there. I think seeing him getting hurt on the way to fullfill his mission is nothing but great. And as such pictured in the movies so far.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."

(This post was edited by AinurOlorin on Feb 20 2013, 11:46pm)


Aragalen the Green
Gondor


Feb 21 2013, 12:27am

Post #18 of 29 (244 views)
Shortcut
I didn't really see Gandalf as being subservient to Galadriel [In reply to] Can't Post

I saw Gandalf being more subservient to Saruman, his superior. Galadriel's role to me seemed more of encouraging Gandalf to show Saruman (as well as the rest of the Council) the evidence that Radagast brought to Gandalf in the shape of the Morgul blade, and urging him to speak up. The main dialogue was between the Wizards. Galadriel "speaks" to Gandalf at a time when Saraman is really doing a "blah blah blah" speech about a human pretending to be a Necromancer, while Galadriel is reading Gandalf's feelings and thoughts. She doesn't outright say "you're wrong, Saruman"; rather she encourages Gandalf to do so.

Also the part at the end when Galadriel realizes that the Dwarves are leaving, and she again "speaks" to Gandalf: "you knew!" He very unapologetically replies "yes". There's no hint from Gandalf he is apologizing to her! No sign of subservience there, at least not to me.

'"Never laugh at live dragons, Bilbo you fool!" he said to himself, and it became a favourite saying of his later, and passed into a proverb.'


billzy2
The Shire


Feb 21 2013, 2:15am

Post #19 of 29 (236 views)
Shortcut
Galadriel [In reply to] Can't Post

 Galdriel is a most interesting Tolkien character. She is the mightiest Elf living in Middle Earth at the time of the events of LOTR and The Hobbit. The Elves held her in great reference, few people realize that she is Elronds mother-in-law and therefore Arwens Grandmother. Yet she had her faults. She was swayed by Feanors firey words and so decided to accompany him along with a great number of Elves in their return to Middle Earth and because of this she with the others on the journey were forever tainted with the horrible event known as the kin slaying ( please refer to the Silmarillion ) so therefore the Wizards must know this and realze that she is wise but not infallible. You call the Istari divine but they to could fall into foollishness, i am referring of course to Saruman and his lust for power and Radagasts basic abandonment of his task and instead deciding to commume mostly with the fauna of Middle Earth., also there task was to aid and encourage the citizens of Middle Earth to stand up to Sauron and his minions. They were definitely wise and powerful but still flawed in their own ways.



Michelle Johnston
Rohan


Feb 21 2013, 7:03am

Post #20 of 29 (202 views)
Shortcut
The Iceberg Techique and Social Etiquette [In reply to] Can't Post

My reference to the book Hobbit was a responce to someone comparing Gandalf book hobbit to Gandalf screen Hobbit. I actually agree with what you say, the reference point for the movie is the full knowledge acquired from the legendarium.

We I know both agree that Gandalf The White in the LOTR films was misreported and the very real problem with the Witch King scene was that having been sent back to complete his task, invested with a blessed renewal by the Ainur, it is inconceivable that the film scene could have happened. I am rarely critical, usually observational, but that was a serious error.

That said,and this also applys to Radagast, they should not be viewed as being presidential super heros their strength is in their subtlety and meekness, rather like Gandhi. They are self effacing they recognise the end game and do not look for external shows of prestige or pay back. By the time of the council Galadriel not only knows whom they really are but the impact of middle earth on them, something she is all to familiar with. She clearly respects Gandalf, supposedly Saruman's junior, in whom she sees the seeds of his downfall. What is also playing out here is her possesion of Nenya. She is co equivalent with Gandalf as a ring bearer and if there is one matter Tolkien seemed to address as regards these rings it is to enhance and develop a sense of foresight and knowing enquiry in their owners. The exchange "why the halfling" is all about that.

I actually think we agree as to whom Gandalf is in relation to Galadriel it is just that you are interpreting the social interactions at the White Council differently. I suspect the same people who find Gandalf off in the W C find Radagast's eccentricity off. I do not, what was key for me is boths inate spiritual power was displayed with exactly the right weight and degree of success. The fact that Gandalf plays the astonished kindly old man to Galadriels beauty and Radagast roles his eyes after a smoke is mere a disembling spirit in human form.

I am really looking forward to how this plays out in December when the sub plot will really get underweigh (C S Lewis spelling). I suspect those that wanted the book Hobbit and didn't like AUJ, as opposed to your considered and mature analysis of the various elements and ultimate delight, like mine, in the film, will be apoplectic with indignation.

I tried to save the shire , and it has been but not for me.


Arannir
Valinor

Feb 21 2013, 7:03am

Post #21 of 29 (194 views)
Shortcut
I am aware of all this... [In reply to] Can't Post

... but I guess we just disagree on how subordinate Gandalf appears in the movies.

Yes, Galadriel is given a rather ambigious image when it comes to status and power in the movies - one actually does not really know what the hell she is doing.

But I am fine with it, since she always had something unclear for me in the books as well.

Again, I rather have some people believe that they are on the same level in terms of status (or whatever), and keep the Gandalf we have in the movies now... the important thing for me are his sacrifices. And they are not undermined imho by the WC scene.


Bombadil
Half-elven


Feb 21 2013, 9:22am

Post #22 of 29 (183 views)
Shortcut
How's this for an idea? The Mirror off Galadriel.. [In reply to] Can't Post

The White Council surrounding
her mirror..
... she looks into each of their minds?

"Remember that the Mirror shows many things
Not all have yet to come to pass
some may never come to be."

On film
.. this Could BE?


(This post was edited by Bombadil on Feb 21 2013, 9:25am)


AinurOlorin
Half-elven


Feb 21 2013, 11:15pm

Post #23 of 29 (128 views)
Shortcut
We do agree on many of these points. And perhaps most of all how wrong that business with The Witch-King was [In reply to] Can't Post

ugh. lol. Gandalf very marginally > Balrog >Witch-King (because, evil Ainur from before the world, who helped form the world, was a lieutenant of Melkor The Morgoth, and was a terror even onto the very High-Elves whom ALL of the Nazgul were nervous of, definitely trumps Phantom-Sorcerer lieutenant of Sauron. Tolkien and the Elves agreed. lol).

I agree with a lot of the other points too, howerver. . . in regards to their powers, I would merely have them represented on par with what they perform in the books. The Hobbit did a better job of that in regards to Gandalf than Rings did, not because Rings did not do justice to the instances of exertion of his power shown in the films, but because Fellowship deleted some of his most astounding moments from the novel, while The Hobbit left pretty much everything in, with some tinkering to the details.

Yet regarding the council scene, and the after meeting. . . I do understand where you are coming from. And as someone who knows the lore, soley for myself, the scene would work. I would read it as you have, taking it as a given, based on existing knowledge, that she is at no point directing him as a superior, merely sharing her thoughts. HOWEVER, taking off my loremaster hat (tall, pointed and blue of course Wink ) and looking at it through the eyes of a lay person, I see an ENTIRELY different picture, and to my mind, one of the purposes of a direct film adaptation is, among many other things, to convey the information of the actual story as accurately as possible, without ruining the dramatic arc of the movie, for people who may never read the novels. And a small number of relatively subtle changes would have been enough to NOT give lay viewers the wrong impressions, and to leave them with a more accurate view. No one watching this movie without prior knowledge would ever guess that Gandalf was sent to give guidance even to the likes of Galadriel, nor that she held his wisdom in such high regard that she desired him to lead The Council of The Wise, rather than herself or Saruman.

As to Radagast. . . I didn't mind his eccentricity for the most part. I generally enjoyed it, I merely think the bird excrement was over the top, and that his eye rolling in the scene where he is performing a powerful spell diminished the moment. Generally I liked him.

In Reply To
My reference to the book Hobbit was a responce to someone comparing Gandalf book hobbit to Gandalf screen Hobbit. I actually agree with what you say, the reference point for the movie is the full knowledge acquired from the legendarium.

We I know both agree that Gandalf The White in the LOTR films was misreported and the very real problem with the Witch King scene was that having been sent back to complete his task, invested with a blessed renewal by the Ainur, it is inconceivable that the film scene could have happened. I am rarely critical, usually observational, but that was a serious error.

That said,and this also applys to Radagast, they should not be viewed as being presidential super heros their strength is in their subtlety and meekness, rather like Gandhi. They are self effacing they recognise the end game and do not look for external shows of prestige or pay back. By the time of the council Galadriel not only knows whom they really are but the impact of middle earth on them, something she is all to familiar with. She clearly respects Gandalf, supposedly Saruman's junior, in whom she sees the seeds of his downfall. What is also playing out here is her possesion of Nenya. She is co equivalent with Gandalf as a ring bearer and if there is one matter Tolkien seemed to address as regards these rings it is to enhance and develop a sense of foresight and knowing enquiry in their owners. The exchange "why the halfling" is all about that.

I actually think we agree as to whom Gandalf is in relation to Galadriel it is just that you are interpreting the social interactions at the White Council differently. I suspect the same people who find Gandalf off in the W C find Radagast's eccentricity off. I do not, what was key for me is boths inate spiritual power was displayed with exactly the right weight and degree of success. The fact that Gandalf plays the astonished kindly old man to Galadriels beauty and Radagast roles his eyes after a smoke is mere a disembling spirit in human form.

I am really looking forward to how this plays out in December when the sub plot will really get underweigh (C S Lewis spelling). I suspect those that wanted the book Hobbit and didn't like AUJ, as opposed to your considered and mature analysis of the various elements and ultimate delight, like mine, in the film, will be apoplectic with indignation.


"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"

"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."


Black Breathalizer
Rohan


Feb 22 2013, 4:58pm

Post #24 of 29 (96 views)
Shortcut
Ganfalf - The Humble Servant of Middle Earth [In reply to] Can't Post

AinurOlorin wrote: (The Istari) should be enchanted by her beauty and respectful of her power and wisdom. . . but none of them, not even Radagast, should be made to seem overwhelmed, overawed, subserviant or out of their depth in her presence. They should take counsel from her, but they should also render counsel to her.

As has been beautifully pointed out by others here, Tolkien fitted the character of Gandalf the Grey into the larger mythology of the Silmarillion AFTER the publishing of the Hobbit. Given his post-Hobbit writing assignment, it was very important to Tolkien that the actions of the Istari be internally consistent to the behavior of his wizard, Gandalf, in The Hobbit. It's the reason why the Istari appeared in Middle Earth as frail, old men. It's the reason why they were expected to encourage, prod, nudge, and advise, but not to use their wisdom and power to dominate or lead. Until the rebirth of Gandalf as Gandalf the White in the hour of Middle Earth's greatest need, they were never meant to be leaders.

A recurring theme of Tolkien's which was highlighted in the telling of the tale of the Istari is that the 'greatest' among us are not necessarily the ones who will rule the day. Saruman, the greatest of the Istari, ultimately failed in his mission because he became increasingly self-center, self-willed, and concerned about his stature among the 'lesser' peoples of Middle Earth.

Contrast this to the humble, self-effacing, traveling wizard that Tolkien created in TH and who became his model for the Istari. Gandalf was MEANT to be subservient to the 'lesser' peoples of Middle Earth. If Tolkien's intent was for the wizards to revered by someone like Galadriel, why in the World would he have one become a haughty dwarf's expedition coordinator? Why would he have Gandalf treat Beorn the way he did? And why in the world would such a being involve himself with the race of the halflings, let alone allow himself to be disrespected by some of them?


Michelle Johnston
Rohan


Feb 22 2013, 5:09pm

Post #25 of 29 (99 views)
Shortcut
Who are these people ? [In reply to] Can't Post

The point about the lay person is spot on. The reveal of Galadriel and Saruman was entirely knowing. If you had no idea who they were then, you certainly would not realize you had the three ring bearers and two Istari and all the interpersonal dynamics that go with them.

That said for those of us who are slightly more interested than the average Wink film goer it was a moment of reaquaintance with old friends. For everyone else its a card marking exercise for Part 11. I see a thread about fears for Part 11. My greatest fear is that we end up with the diary entry feal of TTT because of all the inter cutting.

I think we may be in for a surprise in that the sub plot driven by Gandalf's character arc carries a good deal of weight in the second movie ensuring that gone in a whiff sub plotting e.g. W.C is only a characteristic of Part 1. A real well defined narrative would contrast nicely with the main plot, episodically revelling in the celebration of JRRT set piece sub creations (Beorn, Spiders, Woodelves,Lakeman and Smaug and Smaug/Bilbo). This would leave Part 111 for the strongest personal performances from Thorin and Bilbo and the Dwarves and a relatively straight forward strategic narrative.

I tried to save the shire , and it has been but not for me.

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.