Results 1 to 69 of 69
  1. Nagalnait's Avatar
    Archer of Imladris
    Points
    362
    Posts
    163
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    #1
    In the Books Aragorn wants to be king of Gondor he knows that it is his destany to be the King and he has Narsil with him when he meets to hobbits but Why in the movies did he play that he did not want to be kingand refuse to belive in him self? I like him better in the books he is so confident but not cocky.

  2. Eldorion's Avatar
    Chieftain of the Mark
    Points
    9,086
    Posts
    14,468
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    #2
    The movie-makers felt that they needed to give Aragorn a "journey" to go on, despite their repeated assertions that TLotR is really Frodo's story. Apparently the journey from Ranger to King wasn't enough though, so they added the self-doubt aspect. I personally don't think it was necessary to change the character so drastically just to show him on screen. After all, book-Aragorn worked fine, and movies are not so different that you have to change fundamental aspects of the characters.

  3. Tree's Avatar
    Bookbinder of the Shire
    Points
    3,906
    Posts
    5,731
    Join Date
    May 2007
    #3


    I don't have as much problem with Aragorn's character as I do the events concerning him. Why, for example, did Narsil have to be re-forged and furthermore presented by Elrond himself before the paths of the dead? Why completely change the occasion in which Anduril came into the story?

    And more pertinently- why have Aragorn fall off a cliff?


    <center><strong>Vive La Icon Revolution!</strong></center><center><img src="http://i617.photobucket.com/albums/tt259/ek_lotr/Old%20Plaza%20Ranks/F09.gif" border="0" /></center>

  4. Nagalnait's Avatar
    Archer of Imladris
    Points
    362
    Posts
    163
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    #4
    I agree with you I think that they should have kept how narsil was reforged from the book. I did not think that it was nessesery for Lord Elrond to bring it and how did he get there so fast, I know he is powerful but not that powerful right?

  5. Hallas C. Pehwarin's Avatar
    Master of Minas Tirith
    Points
    9,443
    Posts
    4,396
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    #5
    I found the the character Aragorn in the films can show how one would doubt himself if he did not believe that they had the strength to become a ruler among men and renew a Kingdom that had ended 1000 years ago.

  6. Eldorion's Avatar
    Chieftain of the Mark
    Points
    9,086
    Posts
    14,468
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    #6
    Gondor didn't end, just the line of it's Kings (and properly only the male line).

  7. Saruman's Avatar
    Pilgrim of Isengard
    Points
    1,201
    Posts
    1,020
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    #7
    And more pertinently- why have Aragorn fall off a cliff?

    A question we all ask

  8. Belarung's Avatar
    Scribe of Erebor
    Points
    347
    Posts
    80
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    #8
    Aragorn wanted to be king all along as it was his just right and it was the only way he would get to marry Arwen.
    Why PJ wanted Aragorn to doubt himself to the point that he denounces his kingdom is a question beyond any of us.
    Maybe the man is a genius - doubt it.


  9. Tarawen's Avatar
    Varda
    Points
    7,760
    Posts
    4,929
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    #9
    why have Aragorn fall off a cliff?

    . . . To make him seem invincible? Or to somehow (and in rather a convoluted way) give Arwen another chance to appear in the films? No idea. I agree with everything you said, Tree.


  10. Kiranell Mordagnir's Avatar
    New Soul
    Points
    1,548
    Posts
    2,579
    Join Date
    May 2008
    #10
    And more pertinently- why have Aragorn fall off a cliff?

    Well, they couldn't throw Legolas or Gimli off.


  11. Tree's Avatar
    Bookbinder of the Shire
    Points
    3,906
    Posts
    5,731
    Join Date
    May 2007
    #11

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiranell Mordagnir
    Well, they couldn't throw Legolas or Gimli off.
    I fail to see how throwing Legolas or Gimli off is any more absurd than throwing Aragorn off...

    <center><strong>Vive La Icon Revolution!</strong></center><center><img src="http://i617.photobucket.com/albums/tt259/ek_lotr/Old%20Plaza%20Ranks/F09.gif" border="0" /></center>

  12. Tarawen's Avatar
    Varda
    Points
    7,760
    Posts
    4,929
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    #12
    They needed Legolas to look pretty and Gimli to provide comic relief. I think it's clear that Aragorn was the most dispensable of the three.

  13. Tree's Avatar
    Bookbinder of the Shire
    Points
    3,906
    Posts
    5,731
    Join Date
    May 2007
    #13
    That's a point


    <center><strong>Vive La Icon Revolution!</strong></center><center><img src="http://i617.photobucket.com/albums/tt259/ek_lotr/Old%20Plaza%20Ranks/F09.gif" border="0" /></center>

  14. Yerathiel's Avatar
    Stablehand of the Mark
    Points
    193
    Posts
    62
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    #14

    Quote Originally Posted by Tree
    And more pertinently- why have Aragorn fall off a cliff?
    Haha, when my mom and I watched the movie for the first time, we both just kind of sat there, confused, when he fell off the cliff. It just kind of seemed tacked on and illogical... and I definately agree about Elrond presenting Narsil to Aragorn... and didn't Aragorn already know that he had to go through the Paths of the Dead in the book? But in the movie Elrond told him to go... There are some elements of the movie that really just don't make sense. But it's still awesome, no matter what.

  15. Nagalnait's Avatar
    Archer of Imladris
    Points
    362
    Posts
    163
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    #15
    I agree I saw the movies first but I love the books better than the movies, the moviesare the best no matter what.

  16. Lokter.'s Avatar
    Page of Dol Amroth
    Points
    190
    Posts
    41
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    #16
    I can just imagine the directors sitting around going "How can we make his struggle more emotional, and appealing to people?" and then someone says "I know, lets fling him off a cliff, tied to a Warg!"

    I find that bit pointless, but i can see why they changed Narsil. It shows its importance really, they wanted to make sure people recognised it.

    Or maybe they just forgot while fliming the Rivendell Scens


  17. Thonet's Avatar
    Child of the Shire
    Points
    289
    Posts
    253
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    #17
    Maybe they figured they should have some point to the Warg scene? Other then empty violence?

  18. Lokter.'s Avatar
    Page of Dol Amroth
    Points
    190
    Posts
    41
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    #18
    I would have said there already was a point to the Warg scene. Its supposed to show how dangerous and hard the journey was for the people of Rohan. I think the cliff incident was put there purely for Cinematic effect.

    There is no better way to keep people interested than throwing one of your main characters off a cliff and then having him turn up on a horse days later half dead on the eve of battle.

  19. Tree's Avatar
    Bookbinder of the Shire
    Points
    3,906
    Posts
    5,731
    Join Date
    May 2007
    #19
    "Or maybe they just forgot while fliming the Rivendell Scens"

    I know you're only joking: but just for future reference: Films are not shot in chronological order. LotR is no exception, and (believe it or not) the Grey Havens was one of the first scenes they filmed.


    <center><strong>Vive La Icon Revolution!</strong></center><center><img src="http://i617.photobucket.com/albums/tt259/ek_lotr/Old%20Plaza%20Ranks/F09.gif" border="0" /></center>

  20. Lokter.'s Avatar
    Page of Dol Amroth
    Points
    190
    Posts
    41
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    #20
    I know they arent shot in chronological order. It was just a joke.

    But I didnt know they filmed the Grey Havens first. I read somewhere it was Rivendell.


  21. RangerOfTheSouth's Avatar
    Cottager of Ithilien
    Points
    259
    Posts
    133
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    #21

    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">Wow, i didn't knowtaht they would have fimed the Grey Havens first. I mean, i know that they don't film stuff in chronoligal order, but i didn;t think tat they would have filmed teh last scene first.
    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">Anyway, to the topic, i thought that Aragorn was alright in both the books and the movies. I mean, the movies did alter him, but it was just for the sake of making him more three-dimensional and to show his journey, not just Frodo's. I now this isn't from the books, but i still enjoyed the movies.
    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">The only thing i was a bit unhappy about was when Narsil was reforged into Anduril in the third film, not the first. And the fact that it was presented to him by Elrond. What was the point of that? I mean 1)It wasn't really relevant to the stpry, except for the fact thatAragorn got a cooler sword. 2) how did Elrond get there so quick? I mean, didn't he reforge the thing yesterday. Come on, i know he's an elf, but they can't get halfway caross middle earth in half a day or something.
    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">Edited by: RangerOfTheSouth

  22. RangerOfTheSouth's Avatar
    Cottager of Ithilien
    Points
    259
    Posts
    133
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    #22

    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">Also, what was with the Warg scene? I think it was to show how dangerous the journey to Hlems Deep was, but still... Why was Aragorn made to fall off a cliff? Was there just a bunch of guys sitting around who said 'okay we got 20 minutes to kill with pointless violence.",or "you know what'll be cool? some dude falling off a cliff!" or somthing? What did it contribute to the plot whether or not Aragorn fell off a liff or not? Anyway, sorry for going on about this.

  23. Veldarna's Avatar
    Barrel-Maker of Mirkwood
    Points
    192
    Posts
    22
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    #23
    yeah none of that part contributed to the plot or was in the books, prolly just made to be a time filler.
    Elen síla lúmenna yomentielmo!

  24. Aredhel Ar-Feiniel's Avatar
    Merchant of Mirkwood
    Points
    965
    Posts
    191
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    #24


    I think that book!Aragorn and movie!Aragorn worked on different levels, and were meant to represent different things. Personally, I much more liked the movie version, as I have a bit of a problem with Aragorn's absolute self-assurance in the book, the fact that he talks about being king as if it were just a matter of going there and picking up the seat, and the fact that I would mightily like to ask him why, oh why if Isildur's line was such a precious and unbroken thing they didn't go and claim the throne a couple of generations in the past, instead of going merrily a-tramping while the Stewards held the kingdom together tooth and nail. Just a question. *flutters eyelashes innocently*



    On the other hand, I think that movie!Aragorn worked perfectly well in the context in which they put him. Watching the slow growth and coming to the conscience of his true value by this tormented man was a tad more interesting than witnessing the slow but inexorable gaining of his goal by one who was convinced all along that he would make it, he ought to make it, and everybody else would be happier just because he had done it.

    Then, of course, this is just an opinion.
    P.S. Yep, as I've written elsewhere just today....WHY DID THEY THROW HIM OFF THAT CLIFF??? I mean, watching the hero getting smooched by his horse wasn't exactly my idea of a pleasant way of spending a quarter of an hour in a movie dearly paid for. *righteous expression*

    Edited by: Aredhel Ar-Feiniel

  25. Eldorion's Avatar
    Chieftain of the Mark
    Points
    9,086
    Posts
    14,468
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    #25


    "I have a bit of a problem with Aragorn's absolute self-assurance in the book"

    Aragorn doesn't have absolute self-assurance in the book. Just because he's not as much of an emo as in the movie doesn't mean he never doubts his decisions.

  26. Aredhel Ar-Feiniel's Avatar
    Merchant of Mirkwood
    Points
    965
    Posts
    191
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    #26
    I wouldn't say he was an emo in the movie. He was only a bit (okay: a lot) discouraged about his possibility of making it. And also troubled about his ancestry, which I find perfectly plausible. Let's be sincere: Isildur's line was not exactly a success. Even if the last Kings of Gondor might have behaved a lot better (as much as I love Earnur, riding into Minas Morgul to face the Witch King was not what I'd call very well thought-out for the well-being of the kingdom) Gondor still had a solid enough system of government that it held on after the Kings had gone for a full thousand years. More than that, it had been kept in one piece, while the Northern Kingdom's division were the first cause for its ultimate doom.

    So if I came from such a line of people, and had to base my claim to the throne on this bloodright, I would not feel fully confident about it myself.



  27. Eldorion's Avatar
    Chieftain of the Mark
    Points
    9,086
    Posts
    14,468
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    #27


    "Let's be sincere: Isildur's line was not exactly a success....
    Gondor still had a solid enough system of government that it held on
    after the Kings had gone for a full thousand years"

    Isildur's line had at least survived, which is a credit to Aragorn's family. Additionally, Gondor's survival was not a matter of it being a more solid system, but of it being bigger. Arthedain would have survived the wars with the Witch-king had it been larger, and was only reformed into the Rangers because too few had survived. Gondor was bigger from the beginning because it had been the site of settlement by Numenoreans for a long time before the Fall (and, IIRC, more ships landed there). That doesn't make Gondor better.

    "More than that, it
    had been kept in one piece, while the Northern Kingdom's division were
    the first cause for its ultimate doom."

    No it hadn't. Gondor fought a civil war as well and lost Umbar, Harondor, and the tributaries in Harad. It also became increasingly decentralized towards the end of the Third Age to the point that the fiefs could withhold, at least partially, forces from the Steward.

    "So if I came from such a line of people, and had to base my claim to
    the throne on this bloodright, I would not feel fully confident about
    it myself. "

    Aragorn's claim was not based solely on being a descendant of Isildur. Had he not also been descended from the Kings of Gondor (though not from the same line as Earnur) there is a chance that he would have been turned away the same as Arvedui. In addition to his ancestry, Aragorn's claim was also largely based on his success as a Captain of War (which was established well before TLotR).


  28. Aredhel Ar-Feiniel's Avatar
    Merchant of Mirkwood
    Points
    965
    Posts
    191
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    #28
    Isildur's line had at least survived, which is a credit to Aragorn's family.




    More than a credit, it is sheer good luck. When King Telemnar of Gondor and both his sons died of plague, it cannot really be counted as a demerit to them, can it?
    No it hadn't. Gondor fought a civil war as well and lost Umbar, Harondor, and the tributaries in Harad
    What I meant with 'being kept in one piece' (I'll admit that it was not well worded, sorry for that) is that while the Kingdom of the North got broken in many smaller knigdoms which were then taken out one by one while they fought among themselves, and also thanks to the treason of some against others, Gondor managed to survive as a kingdom its many external wars and its civil war.
    You have a point in saying that Gondor was bigger, so it had more possibility, but what happened to it is that it lost chunks at the edges, not that it got broken and divided and ceased to exist under its name and in its own right. Minas Anor and its dominion went on notwithstanding the loss of Umbar, Harad, and Minas Ithil.
    In addition to his ancestry, Aragorn's claim was also largely based on his success as a Captain of War (which was established well beforeTLotR).
    I don't see what his personal talent for military leadership, as shown before the War of the Ring, has got to do with his suitability as a king, especially since he fought under different names and different banners.
    Of course, once he leads the army to victory on the Pelennor Fields, in addiction to his bloodright as Isildur's Heir, there his military success counts: he's the man who's saved the day, the city and the whole kingdom, plus, he is the last descendant in direct line from the brother of the first king of the abovementioned country. There, and only there, things begin to add up to the profile of the likely King Returning. Let's not forget that the reason why the Stewards kept ruling Gondor was, quoting from LotR, Appendix A, that:
    'No claimant to the crown could be found who was of pure blood, or whose claim all would allow."
    So the true Heir to the Throne of Gondor must be:
    A) Of pure blood.B) Somebody whose worthiness is acknowledged by all.
    Aragorn reveals himself as the claimant for the throne, and acts accordingly, only during the War of the Ring. Before that, he's a captain who fights, however valorously, under the disguise of different names for different commanders. Thorongil was a valiant man, and Denethor's father relied greatly on him; but his glory and his success were that of a captain under the Steward, not of a heir returning to claim the crown and fight defending it.

  29. Eldorion's Avatar
    Chieftain of the Mark
    Points
    9,086
    Posts
    14,468
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    #29




    "More
    than a credit, it is sheer good luck. When King Telemnar of Gondor
    and both his sons died of plague, it cannot really be counted as a
    demerit to them, can it?"

    No it cannot in that case, but at least the
    Northern Line was not ended by an Earnurian style 'single combat'
    with the Witch-king. That said, Arvedui's death could have been
    avoided, but he didn't have too many reasons to believe the Lossoth
    over Cirdan's mariners, and he already had children anyway.

    "what
    happened to it is that it lost chunks at the edges, not that it got
    broken and divided and ceased to exist under its name and in its own
    right. Minas Anor and its dominion went on notwithstanding the loss
    of Umbar, Harad, and Minas Ithil."

    The only difference
    between Gondor and Arnor in this respect is that the Arnorian
    successor-states recognized each others' legitimacy because they
    parted on amicable terms rather than as the result of a civil war,
    like in Gondor. I wouldn't count that as a mark against Arnor.
    Additionally, after the decline of Rhudaur and Cardolan, Arthedain
    began to reassert its authority over the rest of the North. To the King in Minas Anor the descendants of Castamir were mere rebels, but Castamir's descendants surely had the opposite point of view. We get a one-sided view in the 'histories' because Castamir's descendants and followers were ultimately destroyed, but they were more than outlying provinces who tried to gain independence.

    "I
    don't see what his personal talent for military leadership, as shown
    before
    the War of the Ring, has got to do with his suitability as a king,
    especially since he fought under different names and different
    banners. "

    I was thinking more along the lines of
    Aragorn's confidence in his own abilities. His exploits as
    Thorongil would have given him good reason to be confident, even if
    no one else knew who he really was.

    Edited by: Eldorion

  30. Aredhel Ar-Feiniel's Avatar
    Merchant of Mirkwood
    Points
    965
    Posts
    191
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    #30
    No it cannot in that case, but at least the Northern Line was not ended by an Earnurian style 'single combat' with the Witch-king




    About which you are absolutely right. However, the direct descendence of the main line from Anarion had been lost before that, in the confusion of the plague. Earnur was an irresponsible sovereign to say the least, but when he rode off to settle his personal score with the Witch-king he left the kingdom in the hands of a capable man, with powers to act in his stead, and who proved able to negotiate the transition of power very effectively to a line of rulers who held and maintained Gondor for a thousand years. (Which is a very, very long time. Tolkien throws millennia at us, so we do tend to lose a bit the sense of time.)

    From a purely historical point of view, if one line of kings finishes in misery and disgrace reducing itself to landless people who are fostered by kind relatives - the Elves of Imladris -, while another ends while leaving the country in the hands of capable counsellors who keep going, it is not difficult to judge which one has been more successful. It does not by any means imply that Isildur's heirs were dunderheads; but certainly, returning to the point I started from, it is reasonable to imagine that their last descendant would feel uncertain about such a heritage, hence I found the doubts of movie!Aragorn quite plausible.

    The only difference between Gondor and Arnor in this respect is that the Arnorian successor-states recognized each others' legitimacy because they parted on amicable terms rather than as the result of a civil war, like in Gondor.
    But see? It is this apparent amicability that allowed Arnor to disintegrate, and the small kingdoms that were born (however friendly at first) to become immensely weak, so that they could be used as pawns against each other. Arthedain tried to build again one strong kingdom far too late.
    While when two who claimed Gondor rose, they fought each other until one had lost and the other had regained the control of most of the land. It isn't nice , but it's the way things in such circumstances work: whatever the rights and wrongs, if a kingdom is to stay strong, it can't be divided. Not for love, not for hate. Castamir wanted all of Gondor, and when he was defeated his successor found that he had lost only Umbar. The kingdom itself, however diminished, had survived. Eldacar did not seek a truce offering half his realm: he fought for it as a whole, and his descendants kept doing it until the last descendants of the Usurper were vanquished.

    However morally questionable, historically speaking it was the right thing to do; Castamir would have done the same if the places had been switched. Gondor survived, and that's the ultimate proof of the effectiveness of the politics of its kings.

    Maintaining kingdoms is a bloody work, and quite an unpleasant one, if you ask me.
    I was thinking more along the lines of Aragorn's confidence in his own abilities. His exploits as Thorongil would have given him good reason to be confident, even if no one else knew who he really was.
    Oh, now I see what you meant. Yes, of course that would give one good basis to think himself a good ruler. But still, I did find Aragorn's confidence in his right over the board. After all, he sets out as Isildur's Heir, who knows he's a good captain, but who also has to face quite impossible odds. A bit more doubts, even if in private, would have been quite understandable and altogether realistic.



  31. Eldorion's Avatar
    Chieftain of the Mark
    Points
    9,086
    Posts
    14,468
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    #31


    "one line of
    kings finishes in misery and disgrace reducing itself to landless
    people who are fostered by kind relatives - the Elves of Imladris"

    They weren't landless. In fact, after the defeat of Angmar, the territory available to them increased dramatically. They simply didn't have a large enough population anymore, so they reorganized their society into the Rangers. Additionally, it was the heirs of Isildur in childhood who were fostered in Imladris, not the entire population of the Dunedain.

    "The kingdom
    itself, however diminished, had survived. Eldacar did not seek a truce
    offering half his realm: he fought for it as a whole, and his
    descendants kept doing it until the last descendants of the Usurper
    were vanquished."

    The victory was hardly as complete as that. Gondor was able to conquer Umbar for a time, but the Corsairs survived (even if Castamir's biological descendants didn't), and they retook Umbar again. The Corsairs were a constant thread to Gondor until the end of the Third Age. Eldacar had also lost more than just Umbar, as I pointed out in my previous post.

    "However
    morally questionable, historically speaking it was the right thing to
    do; Castamir would have done the same if the places had been switched.
    Gondor survived, and that's the ultimate proof of the effectiveness of
    the politics of its kings."

    When comparing Gondor to Arnor, it's more the proof of the usefulness of having a large population while fighting major wars than proof that the Gondorian Kings did better than the Arnorian ones. Arthedain would have survived and rebuilt after the wars with the Witch-king had they had a larger population to begin with. You can hardly blame the policies of their kings for Elendil having decided to settle in a relatively unpopulated area.

    "A bit more doubts, even if in private, would have been quite understandable and altogether realistic. "

    We don't know what doubts Aragorn might have had privately, though we know he was not as arrogant as you first suggested he was. The simple fact is that Aragorn is not the main character of the book, so you can't expect to know as much about his character as we do about, say, the Hobbits.


  32. Aredhel Ar-Feiniel's Avatar
    Merchant of Mirkwood
    Points
    965
    Posts
    191
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    #32


    Additionally, it was the heirs of Isildur in childhood who were fostered in Imladris, not the entire population of the Dunedain.




    Of course I meant them alone.
    Eldacar had also lost more than just Umbar, as I pointed out in my previous post.
    The fact remains that it was his refusal to a compromise that maintained the uniqueness of the realm of Gondor; as I said, however diminished, it survived as one. I referred to Umbar because we were talking about the Kinstrife. The corsairs were a problem before Castamir; it was only to be expected that they would continue being one.
    You can hardly blame the policies of their kings for Elendil having decided to settle in a relatively unpopulated area.
    That's not what I'm doing. What I'm saying is that it is not a wise policy to divide a kingdom, that it is already not big, in a series of smaller dominions. If you add to this the fact that the place isn't even densely populated, the thing becomes downright suicidal: the first determined opponent'll take out everybody fairly easily. Knowing of these weaknesses in the nature of Arnor, its kings should have strifed even more to keep it one.

    We don't know what doubts Aragorn might have had privately, though we know he was not as arrogant as you first suggested he was.
    What I said was not that he was arrogant, but that he was too self-assured when it came to his right to be king (which isn't a remark to the kind of person he is the rest of the time). He earned his right during the War of the Ring, not before.
    P.S. May I say how intensely satisfying this discussion has been, notwithstanding our differences? It's been a long time since I discussed the matter of Aragorn's right with somebody just as deep into Gondor history...

    Edited by: Aredhel Ar-Feiniel

  33. Eldorion's Avatar
    Chieftain of the Mark
    Points
    9,086
    Posts
    14,468
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    #33




    "The fact remains that it was his refusal to a compromise that maintained the uniqueness of the realm of Gondor; as I said, however diminished, it
    survived as one."

    The point I've been trying to make is that it didn't survive as one since Umbar survived, and we only get records suggesting that because of who the history was written by. The Corsairs were not just provincials who left the kingdom, they were a lot of the most important people in the Kingdom. While they did not claim the name Gondor, they represented a splitting of the Kingdom and of the Dunedain. The Gondorians did not recognize them as legitimate, and I'm sure the reverse was true as well, but that only means, as I said, that the division was not amicable.

    "The corsairs were a problem before Castamir; it was only to be expected that they would continue being one."

    There were no Corsairs before Castamir: the Corsairs were the descendants of Castamir's followers. Umbar had been Numenorean from its founding, and had for the better part of one and a half millennia been controlled by the Kings of Gondor.

    "What I'm saying is that it is not a wise policy to
    divide a kingdom, that it is already not big, in a series of smaller
    dominions... Knowing of
    these weaknesses in the nature of Arnor, its kings should have strifed
    even more to keep it one."

    How far do you think they should have gone? Should they have started a Kin-strife like in Gondor? How is it better to kill many of your soldiers in an - as you point out - already small kingdom rather than try to stay on good terms with the other splinter-states so that you could muster a larger army if need be?

    "What
    I said was not that he was arrogant, but that he was too self-assured
    when it came to his right to be king (which isn't a remark to the kind
    of person he is the rest of the time). He earned his right during the
    War of the Ring, not before."

    I'm a strong Isildurian monarchist, so I think that Aragorn should have had the right to be King of both Gondor and Arnor by his ancestry alone, but I recognize that many would probably have disagreed me, so his victories in war were important too. In any event, his victories convinced people to accept him, probably more than would have if he just showed up at the gates one day. Aragorn probably believed that his ancestry should, at least, give him the right to be King, though, even if he recognized that in actuality he had to prove himself in battle.

    I very much enjoy these discussions as well, so thank you for being willing to go into so much detail in your posts. By the way, you may be interested in this thread about Aragorn's right to the throne (I had a different username back then, which is why no one was calling me Eldorion). My views may have changed somewhat since I posted there since it's been a while, though.

    Edited by: Eldorion

  34. Aredhel Ar-Feiniel's Avatar
    Merchant of Mirkwood
    Points
    965
    Posts
    191
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    #34
    There were no Corsairs before Castamir: the Corsairs were the descendants of Castamir's followers. Umbar had been Numenorean from its founding, and had for the better part of one and a half millennia been controlled by the Kings of Gondor.




    Oh my goodness. How could I write such a thing? Of course the Corsairs are the heirs of Castamir. That teaches me to post about complicated problems of storiagraphy at 3 a.m..
    How far do you think they should have gone? Should they have started a Kin-strife like in Gondor? How is it better to kill many of your soldiers in an - as you point out - already small kingdom rather than try to stay on good terms with the other splinter-states so that you could muster a larger army if need be?

    Well, the fact is this: when one kingdom is split into smaller states, they are going to be at each other's throats. You see it all the time. So what a king should do, however painful it may be, is keep the rebels in control, and if they rise, either try to crush them or perish in the attempt. Otherwise the kingdom is lost in any case. It may seem very nice and civilized to say: you take this bit, I take this other; but from then on they'll be separate states, with separate policies, and easily put one against the other. So in a contest like Middle Earth, a king should hold on to his throne and try to save the realm as a whole, or at least as big a chunk of it as he can manage - see Eldacar.
    While they did not claim the name Gondor, they represented a splitting of the Kingdom and of the Dunedain. The Gondorians did not recognize them as legitimate, and I'm sure the reverse was true as well, but that only means, as I said, that the division was not amicable.
    True, but when the war started, Castamir and Eldacar were fighting for the whole of Gondor; Castamir did not claim his right to rule a part of it as a separate state, but directly wanted the throne. It was a different strife. The way it went, Eldacar refused appeasement and kept trying until he had again Gondor. The Usurpers managed to hold Umbar as their last stronghold, but that was not what they wanted in the beginning; rather the only thing they had managed to retain.
    I'm a strong Isildurian monarchist, so I think that Aragornshouldhave had the right to be King of both Gondor and Arnor by his ancestry alone, but I recognize that many would probably have disagreed me, so his victories in war were important too.
    The crux of the problem is revealed: we had an Isildurian monarchist pitched against an enthusiast Stewardist.
    In a nutshell, my problem with Aragorn's right is that methinks blood alone just ain't enough. And if I had been the Steward, and he had come a-claiming in times of peace, I would have said: "No, thanks. Just why should you be king? We've held Gondor a millennium while you guys ranged along without responsibilities. Well, range another bit, mate."
    While of course, when the would-be king came to the rescue, I'd give him back the staff and say: "Just do it better than Earnur, and we'll live happily ever after." Pity Faramir was a bit too noble to put it like that.
    I very much enjoy these discussions as well, so thank you for being willing to go into so much detail in your posts.
    I study Medieval History. This is the air I breathe.
    And thanks for the link! I'll be sure to check it out.
    Where is Faramir? Say not that he has fallen!

  35. Laelían's Avatar
    Elfling of Lothlorien
    Points
    44
    Posts
    20
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    #35




    There
    are different advantages to a movie vs. a book. In a book, you can describe
    what their views are, what they are thinking, tell a lot about who they are,
    what they've done in the past, who they are now, why they think what they do,
    and so on. A movie is limited to using pictures and the spoken word of the
    character himself and others talking about him. A movie is good for showing
    emotions and actions though. Truly, a picture is worth a thousand words at many
    points - it would take many more words than that to describe exactly the
    feeling portrayed by a five-second smile.

    I
    think the purpose of having Aragorn doubt himself in the movies was to
    emphasize that, unlike Boromir, he did not want lordship over others;
    nor did he want to give in to the temptation for kind of power the ring offered
    and disgrace the race of men as his ancestor Isildur had. That seemed to be his
    primary fear in the movies; that is, to fail; and perhaps it was made too
    extreme. We fans here, who know the nuances of the world of Middle Earth would
    find him somewhat unlike he ought to be, but to a person who knows nothing of
    Lord of the Rings he would come across as a capable leader who is wise enough
    to not want power or the ring, but is able to handle it. Which is, essentially,
    who he is. [Though as some of you have pointed out, and you are correct, he is
    not so confident of his ability to lead seen as he was written.] I wish I could
    say that they could have made him less doubtful, but I can think of no way of
    doing so without crossing into the fine lines of confusion. [Something you DO
    NOT do in movies – you have to ‘dumb it down’ a bit so the audience who does
    not know the plotline already can keep up and enjoy it.] The whole point of
    changing the character in this way was to make sense to people who have not
    read the books, indeed that seems to be the whole orientation of the movie,
    because it is clearly unsatisfactory in many ways [though not all, some is
    better than the books, namely pictures as I said above] to those of us who have
    read the books. But do not all movies butcher their books in some way for this
    purpose? And so, alas, the movie-makers are right as always [that is, they have
    a reason for what they do], and we cannot have books filmed in their entirety
    as they are, or what would be the purpose of having an imagination? [As it is,
    several of my pretty pictures have been ruined by movies, including Elrond. I’m
    quite sure he wasn’t nearly so grave and somber in the books. But we were
    talking about Aragorn.]

    Tree,
    Narsil/Anduril came into the story just at the moment when Aragorn must accept
    his destiny and call on the dead army to war. He goes on to secure Gondor’s
    victory over Sauron’s minions and save the city (for the moment). [Though he
    does not save the world, for that is Frodo’s job.] Elrond brought the sword
    because he fostered Aragorn, Arwen was sick and it was ‘his fault,’ if he did
    not defeat the enemy she would die, he was the one who <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">had[/i] the sword, and <i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">apparently[/i]
    Arwen’s twin brothers don’t exist in the movie. [But that’s a movie for ya.] They
    had to change it because his character was ‘not ready to accept his destiny’
    because of above reasons.

    As
    for falling off a cliff, it’s probably just another “pointless drama” moment,
    [*rolls eyes*] but it did bring out Arwen/Aragorn’s story and the whole
    Evenstar thing [which was barely mentioned in the books]. It also served to
    make Aragorn messier than he usually is, and make sure he didn’t get cleaned up
    for at least the rest of the disc. [I do agree about the comic relief from
    Gimli, and when does Legolas ever <i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">not[/i]
    look pretty? Well said, Larien.]

    Finally,
    please note that Lord of the Rings <i style="mso-bidi-font-style:normal">is not
    only[/i] one story about one person. It is many peoples’ stories. The hobbits
    got an adventure, Gandalf replaced Saruman as the White Wizard, Aragorn
    ascended the throne of Gondor, Theoden was freed from the influence of Saruman,
    the Lady Éowyn defeated the Witch King of Angmar and Éomer ascended the throne
    of Rohan; even Legolas and Gimli had their own journey to make, perhaps
    individually to gain standing and experience, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal">kleos[/i] among their own, but also together to become friends and
    restore the relationship between their two races. So though Frodo’s is the
    main, most important quest, Lord of the Rings is all their stories, not only
    his. So it is with all Tolkien’s books.[O.o i think i wrote too much again]















  36. geordie's Avatar
    Hugo Bracegirdle
    Points
    20,570
    Posts
    14,087
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    #36
    As for falling off a cliff, it’s probably just another “pointless drama” moment, [*rolls eyes*> but it did bring out Arwen/Aragorn’s story and the whole Evenstar thing [which was barely mentioned in the books>.

    Can you remind me, what is the whole Evenstar thing in the movies, and what relation does it bear to the book?

    It's all in the books...

  37. Eldorion's Avatar
    Chieftain of the Mark
    Points
    9,086
    Posts
    14,468
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    #37


    "It may seem very nice and
    civilized to say: you take this bit, I take this other; but from then
    on they'll be separate states, with separate policies, and easily put
    one against the other." ~ Aredhel Ar-Feiniel

    Except that, as it played out, Arthedain was able to make alliance with Cardolan against Angmar and thus survive longer. If they had insisted on fighting it's possible, though by no means certain, that they would have had the manpower to resist Angmar.

    Also, sorry for the slow response; I was a bit distracted from posting this weekend.

    "The way it went,
    Eldacar refused appeasement and kept trying until he had again Gondor.
    The Usurpers managed to hold Umbar as their last stronghold, but that
    was not what they wanted in the beginning; rather the only thing they
    had managed to retain."

    That's somewhat my point. The Usurpers did not maintain control of Gondor, but they effectively split the realm even after the rebellion by moving a lot of the population and controlling a good deal of territory. Eldacar controlled only a portion of what Gondor had been before the Kin-strife (a large portion, though, of course). Neither side got what they wanted, which was control of the whole of Gondor. They both just got a piece.

    "In a nutshell, my problem with Aragorn's right is that methinks blood alone just ain't enough."

    I can respect that opinion, but I think Aragorn himself would disagree. Given that it is a valid political idea and a part of the traditions of the Northern line at least a thousand years, I don't think it makes Aragorn overly sure of himself to believe in the right of his family to rule the Dunedain.

    "I wish I could say that they could have made him less doubtful, but I can think of no way of doing so without crossing into the fine lines of confusion.... The whole point of changing the character in this way was to make sense to people who have not read the books" ~ Laelian

    What exactly was so hard to understand about Aragorn's character as written in the book (even if said character had been presented on screen). I'm not trying to be sarcastic; I really don't find the character to be confusing.

    "we cannot have books filmed in their entirety as they are"

    No one wants the book to have been filmed in its entirety with the story remaining just as it was in the original.

    "So though Frodo's is the main, most important quest"

    Agreed, and I think that Aragorn's story was given too much attention in TTT (and, to a lesser degree, in ROTK as well).

    "So it is with all Tolkien's books."

    "What exactly do you mean by this? The Hobbit is pretty clearly about Bilbo, and Bilbo specifically.

  38. Aredhel Ar-Feiniel's Avatar
    Merchant of Mirkwood
    Points
    965
    Posts
    191
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    #38
    Also,sorry for the slow response; I was a bit distracted from posting this weekend. - Eldorion





    Don't worry. :)
    Except that, as it played out, Arthedain was able to make alliance with Cardolan against Angmar and thus survive longer.
    Which makes them two out of several, and they lost all the same.
    Neither side got what they wanted, which was control of the whole of Gondor. They both just got a piece.
    Still, the continuity of the kingdom, the right of its kings, enough of its territory to go on for more than a millennium got saved. And eventually the Usurpers were beaten, so that the defying bloodline was exstinguished. There ended whatever claim Umbar might have had as a separate part of Gondor - no connection to the ruling kings.

    I can respect that opinion, but I think Aragorn himself would disagree.
    Which is why I don't like this aspect of him. ;) I'm afraid I was raised to thing kings are not born, but made.
    Can you remind me, what is the whole Evenstar thing in the movies, and what relation does it bear to the book? - geordie
    Basically they took the star-shaped jewel Arwen gives Frodo, named it Evenstar, and turned it into the token of love Arwen gives Aragorn. Basically it's their connection, so that when the viewer sees it, he thinks of her. Considering they wanted to integrate Arwen in the movie and make the spectator remember her, it was not a bad idea. Only sometimes it did get quite cheesy. - Aside note: the jewel is pretty though. I own one myself.
    Where is Faramir? Say not that he has fallen!

  39. Tolkus's Avatar
    Thief of the Lone Lands
    Points
    3,746
    Posts
    2,091
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    #39
    <DIV =WebWizRTE marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" leftmargin="1" topmargin="1">The movie was made for those who have never heard of LoTR. Just look at this forum and you can tell that. Because it was broken up into two parts, Frodos and the rest of the fellowship PJ made two heros journies, one for Frodo the other for Aragorn.
    <DIV =WebWizRTE marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" leftmargin="1" topmargin="1">In the book Aragorn knows he will be King because he believes in the prophacy(sp) of the finding of Isildur Bain and does what he can to set things in motion. He does doubt himself in the book on their way to the Fall of Rauros, dwelling back on the loss of Gandaulf and what to do next.
    <DIV =WebWizRTE marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" leftmargin="1" topmargin="1">In history more kings are born into their kingdomship than made, take the English thrown for example, if males were born first...

  40. Tree's Avatar
    Bookbinder of the Shire
    Points
    3,906
    Posts
    5,731
    Join Date
    May 2007
    #40


    "The
    movie was made for those who have never heard of LoTR. Just look at
    this forum and you can tell that"

    That's not true. You may get people on this forum who 'got into' LotR through the films, but that doesn't mean they hadn't heard of it before hand. Tolkien's book is- and was- huge. It's not like people hadn't heard of it before PJ's movies.


    <center><strong>Vive La Icon Revolution!</strong></center><center><img src="http://i617.photobucket.com/albums/tt259/ek_lotr/Old%20Plaza%20Ranks/F09.gif" border="0" /></center>

  41. Eldorion's Avatar
    Chieftain of the Mark
    Points
    9,086
    Posts
    14,468
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    #41






    "Which makes them two out of several, and they lost all the same." ~ Aredhel Ar-Feiniel

    True, but I think they would have lost sooner if they had been weakened by infighting. That's just speculation though, so I can't prove anything.

    "Still,
    the continuity of the kingdom, the right of its kings, enough of its
    territory to go on for more than a millennium got saved"

    I can't, and wasn't trying to, argue with that. In a way I think we're approaching this from different angles, but Gondor was certainly in a better position than Arnor (largely, I think, because it always had a bigger population).

    "I'm afraid I was raised to thing kings are not born, but made."

    I was raised in a rather anti-monarchical environment (the US), but I'm wary of applying modern ideas to a story set in the very distant (and mythological) past. I certainly don't judge characters from a story set 6000 years ago by whether or not they conform to modern sensibilities. If someone in the real world claimed the right to rule, say, France based on descent from Charlemagne, I wouldn't respect that, but that's because of the very different political framework that exists now as opposed to the one in Middle-earth.

    In short: Aragorn's claim was valid, or at least respectable, to the people of Middle-earth based on what they believed, and it seems rather odd to be critical of his character for having a non-modern mindset when he didn't live in a time even remotely resembling the modern world.

    "The movie was made for those who have never heard of LoTR." ~ Tolkus

    The massive existing fandom of the book was a large part of PJ's marketing pitch to New Line and to his financers. There's a good chance that, had there not been a guaranteed audience of millions, PJ would never have been able to make his films.



    Edited by: Eldorion

  42. Aredhel Ar-Feiniel's Avatar
    Merchant of Mirkwood
    Points
    965
    Posts
    191
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    #42
    In a way I think we're approaching this from different angles, but Gondor was certainly in a better position than Arnor (largely, I think, because it always had a bigger population).
    Yes, it is true that they had more people - still, I'm afraid that, however respecting your opinion, which is very legitimate,I will still affirm that it was a very great mistake on the part of the Kings of Arnor to agree to break their kingdom, lose its continuity, and weaken it.
    I was raised in a rather anti-monarchical environment (the US), but I'm wary of applying modern ideas to a story set in the very distant (and mythological) past




    You are misunderstanding me here. I don't mean, at all, to apply modern sensibilities to ancient mindsets. Why, they should chase me from my History course if I tried to do that.What I meant is that to be the king, the way I see it (and exactly applied to the ancient conception of it), is a bit different than being born into the royal family.

    Example: the Roman emperors. When they are chosen just by their bloodright, you have a bunch of crazed megalomaniacs and irresponsibles, while when they are chosen and adopted for their qualities as in the Antonine dinasty, you have a succession of competent, good rulers. So they are kings whom (even if very often bloodrelatives of the emperor) are still chosen for their qualities. They are kings because of the kind of persons they are, and not for the blood that runs in their veins alone.

    Or take Alexander the Great. When his father dies he's nominally the king, but everybody expects he'll be a weakling in the hand of his mother and his father's counsellors, and who won't be able to hold Macedonia against its enemies. While he goes and builds an empire. Another king made.
    While think of all the incapable people who had crowns on their heads, were called kings, and were nothing more than puppets in the hands of others, or of their own whims.

    So going back to Aragorn, he certainly shows he is very worthy of the crown, and my perplexity at his claim before he does so is the very same the Macedonians felt towards Alex the Great, to make a comparison.
    Where is Faramir? Say not that he has fallen!

  43. Tolkus's Avatar
    Thief of the Lone Lands
    Points
    3,746
    Posts
    2,091
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    #43
    You are right Tree, sholud have said, "have not read the book yet".

  44. Demetrius Joannus's Avatar
    Youth of the Mark
    Points
    66
    Posts
    8
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    #44


    I like both the movie Aragorn and the book Aragorn.
    I think they were both portrayed well...

    In the books, there's SOOO much more information, and dialogue, and thoughts.. so we understand Aragorn more. If they put Aragorn as self-confident in the movies ...he`s probably seem aweful stuck up because the movies can't cover as much about him as the books did.

    I really love how they did his Ring of Barahir in the movies. Truly magnificent. Got a replica, myself! 'tis a marvelous ring. Recommend it to anyone!

    Amor vincit omnia

  45. LotrFan19's Avatar
    New Soul
    Points
    4
    Posts
    4
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    #45
    I like how he's confident in the books. But in the movies I liked him best as a ranger, not a king

  46. AM's Avatar
    Wanderer of the Lone Lands
    Points
    451
    Posts
    40
    Join Date
    May 2010
    #46
    I think I liked him more in the movies,in the books he is quite too... noble for me!But I hated the way in which Petter Jackson had him and Elrond ''fighting'' for Arwen.Elrond loved Aragorn as his own son,right?But,in my opinion,ARAGORN is perfect,no in both the films and books!!!!
    Onen i - Estel Edain,u-chebin estel anim

  47. AlyciaDianne's Avatar
    New Soul
    Points
    22
    Posts
    11
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    #47
    <DIV =WebWizRTE marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" leftmargin="1" topmargin="1">Simple. Its hollywood, hollywood = drama, drama = more people go see the movie. Therefore hollywood dramatizes everything.

  48. Túrin_Turambar's Avatar
    Winemaker of Lothlorien
    Points
    1,075
    Posts
    893
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    #48
    Aragorn is perfect in the books, there is a slight bother in the way he doesn't want his crown in the film, all that reluctance, but other than that he's just awesome!
    "'Hark', the Herald Túrin sings, 'Lore be here that halfir brings'!"

  49. Eldorion's Avatar
    Chieftain of the Mark
    Points
    9,086
    Posts
    14,468
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    #49
    Peter Jackson is not a Hollywood director and Lord of the Ringswas hailed for being largely outside studio control as it was thousands of miles away from Hollywood. It even technically counted as an independent film based on funding, according to The Frodo Franchise.



  50. Túrin_Turambar's Avatar
    Winemaker of Lothlorien
    Points
    1,075
    Posts
    893
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    #50
    It's actually even considered a "low budget" film.
    "'Hark', the Herald Túrin sings, 'Lore be here that halfir brings'!"



  51. well for me Aragorn in the books and in the movies is perfect whether he wants to be the king or not

  52. SarumanRingMaker's Avatar
    Pilgrim of Isengard
    Points
    1,655
    Posts
    551
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    #52
    I didn't think Aragorn was done that badly. This could just be more of a product of Viggo Mortensen's acting and not how PJ wrote the character.

    I would call Aragorn one of the main characters of the story (book or film) and for PJ to want to show a journey, a development of it, is an understandable decision, in my opinion. Aragorn was far from "perfect" in the books, he had his doubts, and struggles, there's nothing wrong with bringing out more of that for the films. My issues lie with falling off the cliff, and beheading the Mouth of Sauron. All that build up to turning from Ranger to King, didn't matter anymore, because it wasn't as "cool" as chopping of ugly evil dude's head.

    As for the cliff-falling, I think it was a product of previous bad decisions, almost like a domino effect. Instead of leaving Theoden leaving Edoras with soldiers, prepared to engage Saruman in battle. Theoden leads an exodus of Edoras as a "retreat" to Helm's Deep. Well, now somehow Theoden needs to be aware that Saruman is marching his army to Helm's Deep, and then warn them to properly get ready in time. Because ya know, at this time Rohan's got nothing but a few guards in Edoras, the rest of commoners who've "seen too many winters" or "too few." Anyway someone has to serve as the guy who warns Theoden he made a dumb mistake, and I guess Aragorn was the chosen one.

    Domino effect. "One ill turn deserves another."
    Why youth? There is already enough youth. Why not a fountain of smart?

  53. Eldorion's Avatar
    Chieftain of the Mark
    Points
    9,086
    Posts
    14,468
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    #53


    "there's nothing wrong with bringing out more of that for the films"



    Perhaps, but the film-makers actions altered the fundamental character of Aragorn far more than they brought out existing characteristics.

    Edited by: Eldorion

  54. SarumanRingMaker's Avatar
    Pilgrim of Isengard
    Points
    1,655
    Posts
    551
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    #54
    Eldorion:Perhaps, but the film-makers actions altered the fundamental character of Aragorn far more than they brought out existing characteristics.

    Well, of course when he decapitates the Mouth of Sauron, and his speech at Helm's Deep "Show them no mercy, for you will receive none," are huge alterations to his character. But if we are specifically talking about his transition from ranger to king, I don't see how he is fundamentally changed.

    I don't think Aragorn was as absolutely certain of himself as many seem to think. In Lothlorien Aragorn is uncertain of his path, and this to me seems like Aragorn really doesn't know what he wants to do

    "Do you not know, Boromir, or do you choose to forget the North Stair, and the high seat upon Amon Hen, that were made in the days of the great kings? I at least have a mind to stand in that high place again, before I decide my further course. There, maybe, we shall some sign that will guide us." (The Great River)

    While I don't think movie Aragorn is as uncertain as many seem to say he is, "I will not let the White City fall, nor our people fail." Pretty strong words for Aragorn to say to a dying Boromir, even stronger than what he told Boromir in the books.Edited by: SarumanRingMaker
    Why youth? There is already enough youth. Why not a fountain of smart?

  55. Eldorion's Avatar
    Chieftain of the Mark
    Points
    9,086
    Posts
    14,468
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    #55
    I was referring more to Aragorn's commitment to his birthright and to becoming King. He was vague on the specifics of what he would do, yes, and he certainly had self-doubt; but he was hardly defined by angst over his ancestry. In the film he was constantly grappling with heritage and the "weakness" in his blood.
    Most importantly, as you point out, he is far more brutal in the films, beginning with his manhandling of Frodo in his very first scene in the trilogy.



    BTW, congrats on the ATR. Pengolodh's always been a favourite of mine, though when I had him he didn't have the fancy symbol on the end, just a -dh.

  56. SarumanRingMaker's Avatar
    Pilgrim of Isengard
    Points
    1,655
    Posts
    551
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    #56
    Why thank you Eldorion. I'm not sure what I did, but it's a neat avvie.
    Why youth? There is already enough youth. Why not a fountain of smart?

  57. Eowyn_23's Avatar
    New Soul
    Points
    12
    Posts
    7
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    #57
    I love Aragorn in the books and the movies. Yes he is diffrent in the movies but I love his self doubt and the fact that he doubts his destiny.
    I liked it when he fell off the cliff with the warg, my heart just stopped for a second from shock.
    I think they did that scene to make him more vulnerbale and seem less invinceble. Because in the first movie he looks like the big hero en now he falls of a cliff and almost dies.
    So I liked it, I thought it was a nice touch. What I hated was the Legolas-Mumakil show off, or the Legolas surfing in Helms deep stuff.

  58. Jingizu's Avatar
    Archer of Ithilien
    Points
    570
    Posts
    10
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    #58


    Hmm, personally I think it was a shift from a "king-in-waiting" in the books, to a "reluctant king" in the movies. Yes, book-Aragorn was confident in himself and proud of his lineage BUT he definitely did have doubts about his decisions and the path he shoudl take after Gandalf's fall in Moria, yet he never doubts what his ultimate goal is, i.e. to defeat Sauron and become King of Gondor and Arnor both, so that he can marry Arwen. Her hand in marriage is the driving force behind Aragorn and his actions. In the movies though, it seems that only the defeat of Sauron is a driving force, and saving Frodo. That "for Frodo" at the end of RotK was revolting!

    Although I think Viggo did a fine job of portraying Aragorn, I did not much like the personality changes. He would still have made a great character if he was more like the "original" in the books.



  59. Athelas_H's Avatar
    Guard of the Mark
    Points
    2,232
    Posts
    1,206
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    #59
    <DIV =WebWizRTE leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    Quote Originally Posted by SarumanRingMaker
    I didn't think Aragorn was done that badly. This could just be more of a product of Viggo Mortensen's acting and not how PJ wrote the character.
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">I think it was the script and its big changes from the book that made film Aragorn a bad character. Viggo did a great job though,considering the material he had to work with.
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    Quote Originally Posted by SarumanRingMaker
    My issues lie with falling off the cliff, and beheading the Mouth of Sauron. All that build up to turning from Ranger to King, didn't matter anymore, because it wasn't as "cool" as chopping of ugly evil dude's head.
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">I'm with you on that. I thought that Aragorn chopping off the Mouth of Sauron's head made him appear to be too 'weak' to become King in the sense that he didn't show any mercy. Also, there's this book quote:
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">' "Is there anyone in this rout with authority to treat with me?" he [Mouth of Sauron] asked. "Or indeed with wit to understand me? Not thou at least!" he mocked, turning to Aragorn with scorn. "It needs more to make a king than a piece of elvish glass, or a rabble such as this. Why, any brigand of the hills can show as good a following!"
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">Aragorn said naught in answer, but he took the other's eye and held it, and for a moment they strove thus; but soon, though Aragorn did not stir nor move hand to weapon, the other quailed and gave back as if menaced with a blow. "I am a herald and ambassador, and may not be assailed!" he cried.' (LOTR, ROTK, V, The Black Gate Opens)
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">How Aragorn reacts to MoS's wordsin the the book shows far more strength in him than the film Aragorn. He doesn't need to prove his stength and ability to become King through physical strength as film Aragorn does.
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">Both film Aragorn and book Aragorn have strengths and weaknesses. I think that film Aragorn is definately the weaker version but there are moments in the films when he does show some strength other than just physicalstrength. One moment that comes to mind is when he heals Éowyn. In the book this happens (as you all know, but I think we need to take a closer look at this quote):
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">' [Aragorn says to Éomer:] "Few other griefs amid the ill chances of this world have more bitterness and shame for a man's heart than to behold the love of a lady so fair and brave that cannot be returned. Sorrow and pity have followed me ever since I left her desperate in Dunharrow and rode to the Paths of the Dead; and no fear upon that way was so present as the fear for what might befall her." [...] "Awake, Éowyn, Lady of Rohan!" said Aragorn again, and he took her right hand in his and felt it warm with life returning. "Awake! The shadow is goneand all darkness is washed clean!" Then he laid her hand in Éomer's and stepped away. "Call her!" he said,and he passed silently from the chamber.' (LOTR, ROTK, V, The Houses of Healing)
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">In the ROTK film (EE), Aragorn stays with Éowyn and is there when she awakes. I believe that this moment reveals a strength in film Aragorn that book Aragorn does not have. Film Aragorn is willing to stay and face up to whatever Éowyn may say to him, this being the first time that they have seen each other sinceAragorn rejected her and left her to go on the Paths of the Dead. It is an awkward moment, but film Aragorn is willing to take the risk. He needed to stay with her in the film so that he at least had a moment of non-physical strength that showed that he was ready to become King.
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">On the other hand, book Aragorn avoids the awkward situation altogether by leaving before Éowyn awakes. He is too ashamed and this shows, revealing a weakness in him. Another quote from the book that reveals a non-physical weakness in book Aragorn is this:
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">' "Nay, lady," he said, and taking her by the hand he raised her. Then he kissed her hand, and spang into the saddle, and rode away, and did not look back; and only thosewho knew him well and were near to him saw the pain that he bore.' (LOTR, ROTK, V, The Passing of the Grey Company)
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">The fact that he did not look back reveals that he is ashamed and cannot bring himself to do so; in my opinion, he shows a weakness again.
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">Another scene in the ROTKfilm (EE) which shows film Aragorn as not being King material, is the scene where he looks into the palantír. HE DROPS IT!!!!!!!!! Now that is weak (not physically); he can't even use it properly as he has not the strength to do so. Book Aragorn handled that situation a lot better (we assume, as we don't ever fully know what happened with Aragorn and the palatnír).
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">Book Aragorn isjust as (if not more)realistic than film Aragorn, IMO, because he is not perfect (as some people say): he has his weaknesses too.
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">Overall, film Aragorn , book Aragorn .Edited by: Stinker_8

  60. Aelinmir's Avatar
    Needleworker of Mirkwood
    Points
    568
    Posts
    109
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    #60

    [/QUOTE]

    Haha, when my mom and I watched the movie for the first time, we both just kind of sat there, confused, when he fell off the cliff. It just kind of seemed tacked on and illogical... and I definately agree about Elrond presenting Narsil to Aragorn... and didn't Aragorn already know that he had to go through the Paths of the Dead in the book? But in the movie Elrond told him to go... There are some elements of the movie that really just don't make sense. But it's still awesome, no matter what.
    [/QUOTE]


    It was Gandalf returned or the twins that told Aragorn about the Paths of the dead. no way Elrond could have made it to Dunharrow(spelling) with in the time frame of the movie. And I think Aragorn falling off the cliff was for dramatic effect that was unnessesary.
    Alas! for the gulls. No peace shall I have again under beech or elm.

  61. SarumanRingMaker's Avatar
    Pilgrim of Isengard
    Points
    1,655
    Posts
    551
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    #61
    Aelinmir: no way Elrond could have made it to Dunharrow(spelling) with in the time frame of the movie.

    Doesn't this just prove the Elves showing up so quickly to Helm's Deep is not an inconsistancy with the film, but proves my theory that Elrond has unlocked the secret to teleportation?

    It was the twins who told Aragorn about the Paths of the Dead, but this was as they said, a message from their father. I think to cut down on introducing more characters, PJ just decided to condense and let Elrond tell Aragorn himself, instead of through messengers.

    P.S. Dunharrow is correct. Edited by: SarumanRingMaker
    Why youth? There is already enough youth. Why not a fountain of smart?

  62. Aelinmir's Avatar
    Needleworker of Mirkwood
    Points
    568
    Posts
    109
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    #62

    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">On the other hand, book Aragorn avoids the awkward situation altogether by leaving before Éowyn awakes. He is too ashamed and this shows, revealing a weakness in him
    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">Book Aragorn does not show weakness by leaving Eowyn, he was up till dawn working in the House of Healing tending to many injured with the twins.
    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">teleportation...
    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" topmargin="1" leftmargin="1" ="WebWizRTE">I wastoo tired to go get my book...Edited by: Aelinmir
    Alas! for the gulls. No peace shall I have again under beech or elm.

  63. Athelas_H's Avatar
    Guard of the Mark
    Points
    2,232
    Posts
    1,206
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    #63
    <DIV =WebWizRTE leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    Quote Originally Posted by Aelinmir
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">Book Aragorn does not show weakness by leaving Eowyn, he was up till dawn working in the House of Healing tending to many injured with the twins.
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">When I said that he was 'weak' I did not mean that he was tired or physically weak in any way. He is 'emotionally / mentally' weak (does that make sense?) and full of feelings of shame because of what he said to Éowyn when he left to go on the Paths of the Dead. It is not the right time for him to be dealing with this or discuss what happened because he has to go and heal other people. He doesn't have the time because there are more important matters to deal with and also he himself is not ready to face up to the situation. He finds a small gap of time where he can leave before Éowyn awakes, but still manage to heal her, so he takes it. Maybe Aragorn doesn't want Éowyn to see that he is ashamed of what he said to her. Remember,Éowyn doesn't want his pity and understanding, she wants his love. Heknows he can't give her that so he leaves and doesn't want her to be confronted withdisappointment again when she sees his face. Perhaps he also does not want to know ' "... to what she will awake: hope, or forgetfulness, or despair, I do not know. And if to despair, then she will die," ' (LOTR, ROTK, V, The Houses of Healing) -[Aragorn says this]but fears that she will wake to depair and blame himself further for this, adding to his shame. He wants to avoid all of this; that is why he leaves and it can be interpreted as a flaw of weakness in him.
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">
    <DIV leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1" ="WebWizRTE">Aragorn waited with Faramir and Merry until they awoke so doesn't it strike you as a bit strange that he did not do the same for Éowyn?Edited by: Stinker_8

  64. Jingizu's Avatar
    Archer of Ithilien
    Points
    570
    Posts
    10
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    #64


    Quote Originally Posted by Stinker_8
    Maybe Aragorn doesn't want Éowyn to see that he is ashamed of what he said to her. Remember,Éowyn doesn't want his pity and understanding, she wants his love. ...but fears that she will wake to depair and blame himself further for this, adding to his shame.

    Aragorn waited with Faramir and Merry until they awoke so doesn't it strike you as a bit strange that he did not do the same for Éowyn?
    It doesn't strike me as especially strange that Aragorn waited for Merry and Faramir to wake but not for Éowyn. Faramir was needed in the city and Merry was his companion and friend. Éowyn was neither, just a chance-met woman, sister of his friend, who fell in love with him.

    I also don't think that Aragorn was ashamed of what he said to Éowyn at their last parting, but is rather ashamed that she loves him and he cannot reciprocate that love. He also tells Éomer that she loves him [her brother] far more truly than she ever loved Aragorn, which proves true. Aragorn [and Gandalf and later Faramir] saw the kind of love she had for Aragorn, i.e. "the love of a soldier for his captain" and the hope that he will bring her glory and fame. Not the true love of a woman for a man. Éowyn also upon waking recalled that she heard Éomer's voice calling to her, not Aragorn's.

    Hmm, but I'm digressing... I just don't see why Aragorn would wait for her to wake, especially with so many others needing his aid. After all, he left the moment that Merry was awake, ditto for Faramir... perhaps he thought it would cause Éowyn only more despair and pain to see him after she awakened?




  65. Athelas_H's Avatar
    Guard of the Mark
    Points
    2,232
    Posts
    1,206
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    #65
    <DIV =WebWizRTE leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1">
    Quote Originally Posted by Jingizu
    <DIV =WebWizRTE leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1">I also don't think that Aragorn was ashamed of what he said to Éowyn at their last parting, but is rather ashamed that she loves him and he cannot reciprocate that love.
    <DIV =WebWizRTE leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1">
    <DIV =WebWizRTE leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1">
    <DIV =WebWizRTE leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1">Iagree withthe text in red but Ithink thathis shame was also because he had to tell her or hint to her that he doesn't love her and he knew that that would upset her immensly. Therefore he was ashamed of what he said becasue he knew he had to say something at some point and it broke his heart to do so. I think he feared that she would take her own life (which she did attempt by seeking death in battle) and he placed the blame on himself as the cause of this when she later came close to death.
    <DIV =WebWizRTE leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1">
    Quote Originally Posted by Jingizu
    <DIV =WebWizRTE leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1">Hmm, but I'm digressing... I just don't see why Aragorn would wait for her to wake, especially with so many others needing his aid. After all, he left the moment that Merry was awake, ditto for Faramir... perhaps he thought it would cause Éowyn only more despair and pain to see him after she awakened?
    <DIV =WebWizRTE leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1">
    <DIV =WebWizRTE leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1">He did chat with Merry for a little while afterwards about pipeweed, etc.
    <DIV =WebWizRTE leftmargin="1" topmargin="1" marginheight="1" marginwidth="1">Yes, as I said above, Aragorn didn't want Éowyn to be faced with disappointment again when she saw his face, remebering the last time they spoke and saw each other.

  66. FrozenBurn's Avatar
    New Soul
    Points
    69
    Posts
    10
    Join Date
    May 2011
    #66
    I think the Warg ambush was for Aragorn to fall in the cliffs and for him to see that 10,000 orcs are coming and they must get ready.

  67. sahara's Avatar
    Gardener of Lothlorien
    Points
    212
    Posts
    13
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    #67
    Re-reading the books for the first time in a really long while, I'm remembering just how much I actually really love book Aragorn... In the movies he is a really lovable character and I think in all honesty if he had been played any closer to the books it would have comeacrossasarrogance and it would have made it really hard to care about him. Having insight into his thoughts in the books you know that he has doubts in a way I don't think is possible to portray in a film.
    Little bits in the film annoy me but I do love it and have watched itnumerous times. The warg thing works in the movie if you haven't read the books.. No real need for it as someone that has read them but my husband who never has doesn't see it as out of place.
    Not having the sword with him on the journey narks me a little bit more than that though, I get needing to add more to the romance of the movie, all movies need romance nowadays but it was just unreasonable for them to have us think it has taken them months to get to the dunharrow and battles tragedy and what not and that Elrond can make it there in days!! (but then I do have to tell my husband to shh whenever he says why didnt they get theeagles to take Frodo rather than that year long walk)..!!

  68. LadyÉonn's Avatar
    Juvenile of the Mark
    Points
    80
    Posts
    26
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    #68
    I liked the added conflict of Aragorn's character. I think it was imperative for a dynamic film story-line.


    I found myself more able to identify with him and his self-conflict, having to do what he was born to do even though he had spent most of his life avoiding his birth-right.
    There are many inconsistencies in the film, despite the deviations from the books, but that's the benefit of having<b style="font-style: italic; "> Movie Magic![/b] LOL
    Story-lines in Books and Popular movies work very differently.

  69. Bromporke's Avatar
    New Soul
    Points
    125
    Posts
    42
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    #69
    I think I liked the humble, driven Aragorn from the books who was sure of his purpose and didn't waver from his course. I think there's something about a person who is driven yet not arrogant about it. They're just convinced of what their purpose in life is and won't slow down until it comes to fruition. I think it's possible to confident without being arrogant. Even When Aragorn became king, he acted humbly by healing people after ROTK...


    When can I wake up from this dream?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •