At one point in time he turned pinecones into mini-fireballs. He was able to kill the Great Goblin with “a flash” and get away. He lit a fire under impossible conditions. He locked a door magically, but the balrog destroyed the door. He killed a balrog singlehandedly. He broke another wizards staff at a distance. Rescued Faramir with beams of light. Apparently some sort of magic fire or lightning used in battle with Nazgul at Roundtop. etc.
Admittedly a moderate level D&D wizard/druid could do all of these and more. But still, Gandalf uses magic.
I’m afraid I couldn’t scare up a cite at short notice, but I seem to recall someone associated with the films (might have been Jackson himself) saying that they deliberately cut back on the glowing swords for fear that the melees (particularly in Moria) would look too much like a bunch of lightsabers hacking about in a fantasy movie. So, they kept it to Sting being the only glowing sword.
Since there are already two people who have specifically referenced the commentary on one of the extended editions, and what PJ says at that point, unless someone has reference to some other comment from PJ or someone else in a position to know, it’s all kind of pointless speculation.
As for lissener’s comment, it’s been established that Glamdring DOES glow in the mines. So there wasn’t any inconsistency to fanwank.
I love the first one, but feel it had some minor flaws
I like the second one very much, but feel it had larger flaws that derive from the minor flaws of the first.
I feel the third one is a great stinking pile of donkey vomit that is so poorly done that it reached back in time with its demonic hands and choked all that was wonderful and beautiful out of the first two–except that its flaws are only logical extensions of the mistakes made in the first.
I think Elijah Wood, though a fine actor on the face of it, was horribly miscast, as Frodo should not be a young adult. Because he is so young and presented as being so, ah, whiny, he is undercut as a hero whose virtues are perspicacity, will, & self-sacrifice rather than kicking ass. He’s too PASSIVE. Take the scene at the Ford, where Arwen defies the Nazgul. By giving that act of defiance to her rather than him, Jackson begins a pattern in which Frodo is perpetually a damsel in distress rather than a positive actor. Never in the rest of that movie nor the two following does he act deviously, boldly, or resolutely. He is entirely a mechanism to allow Sam to be bold.
That’s off the top of my head. I hesitate to say more as it would be a major thread hijack.
Time for me to read it again. I just saw the film and remember a web site describing her being filmed carrying a large doll, but I can’t remember that from the book.
Arwen was never at the ford in the book. In the book Frodo stands defiant and is saved at the last minute by a combination of Glorfindal (sp?) riding to the rescue and Gandalf and Elrond raising the waters (it might have been just one or the other, since I have not read the books in a few years).
It’s been a few years since I’ve read the book, too, but that’s what I remember.
In the movie, Arwen supplants Glorfindel as the elf who rides with Frodo to the Ford. IIRC, Elrond was primarily responsible for the flood, but Gandalf admitted to adding the “horses” in the water.
Elrond unleashes the waters to flood the Ford of Bruinen. Gandalf adds the touch of whitewater horses. Glorfindel had gotten off of Asfaloth and sent him on to the ford with Frodo on his back. So, after Frodo BARELY gets across the ford ahead of the Riders, and ends up on the path up the other bank, he turns and defies the Riders, having taken out his Barrow-sword and declaring that they would have neither the Ring, nor him. At that point, the Witch-King utters a command of power, breaking Frodo’s sword, and the Riders ride into the ford. But then the flood comes, and before the Riders can back out of the ford, Glorfindel arrives with the rest of the group (Aragorn, Sam, Pippen and Merry), revealing himself as he is “on the other side.” This scares the horses of the Riders, and they carry the Riders into the flood, ending the whole shebang.
Arwen, presumably, was off knitting a shawl or something…
Um…I was talking about the movie. You ASKED me why I dislike the movies (overall, that is; I still love the first one, and while I don’t love the second I wouldn’t kick it out of bed).
Yes, there were some guys in New Zeland…it allways comes back to NZ, doesn’t it?..when they were filming the movies. These guys were spying on the film sets, describing how they built the set for Minas Tirth, however you spell it. They reported on stuff on their web site, and mentioned the actress riding a horse carrying a large doll that was supposed to be Frito. Er, Frodo.
I believe she was embroidering the standard that Aragorn flew on the corsair ship, the standard that proclaimed to all that he was the heir of Elendil and rightful king of Gondor. It is not really appropriate to sneer at her for engaging in needle work. Tolkien makes it clear that the making of soft works like the standard, and the cloaks that Galadriel gives the fellowship are actually important. And I would like to say a word of praise to Arwen for not taking inappropriate risks and never once needing to be rescued. I don’t expect every female character to be Luthien rescuing her ownself from her prison in the tree, or Galadriel leading people across the ice bridge and holding back the ravages of time from Lorien, or Eowyn riding out to the battle field.
My love of Eowyn & Miranda Otto obliges me to point out that movie-Aragorn was a wanker, an idiot, a blind fool who was unable to appreciate the blessings available to him, a wanker*, a cad who BROKE POOR EOWYN’S HEART AFTER LEADING HER ON, a pervy-hobbit fancier who only made it to the throne of Gondor because he had Gandalf greasing the weels for him, and a wanker.** The entire time I was watching the movies the other day, I kept muttering, “He’s not worthy of you, Eowyn! Seriously! I mean, NO ON is worthy of you, really, but he’s less worthy than most! Look, Gimli obviously fancies you, and Legolas will do anything Gimli says, so just marry the two of them and bear their children.***”
*Yeah, I know I already wrote “wanker.” It bears repeating.
** In fact it bears repeating twice.
*** Well, Gimli’s children. I’m not sure if Eowyn marrying Legolas & Gimli would be polygynys or polyandry.
