Which is worse? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Boromir88 · 08-04-2004, 08:03 PM

As we know, PJ thought about putting Arwen in at Helm's deep (thankfully that didn't happen). But, let's play a little what if, what if Arwen was at Helm's deep? Which do you think is worse, Arwen at Helms Deep, or Arwen's falling suddenly ill, and her fate being "tied" to the ring?

Morsul the Dark · 08-04-2004, 09:33 PM

I believe the present way is better

I do however think Arwen at Helm's Deep would be easier to understand I didn't get it at all that her fate was tied to the rings why would it be?

Although having her at helm's deep is more annoying after all Eowyn is the strong one

Meela · 08-05-2004, 05:48 AM

Arwen is not a warrior. To have her at Helm's Deep would be against her typical character, and would look truly odd. Although having her fate in particular tied to the ring is out of place, at least it's something that could apply - every character is tied to the fate of the ring.

Eomer of the Rohirrim · 08-05-2004, 09:34 AM

Meela's got it dead on. That line from Elrond wasn't meant to get the popcorn-munchers thinking about it in detail, it was merely to brainwash them into thinking Ring - Important!

Arwen fighting at Helm's Deep would have been worse than some war atrocities.

Encaitare · 08-06-2004, 02:28 PM

Wow, the whole fate tied to the ring thing was lame, but when I heard PJ almost had her come to Helms Deep I sighed in relief. It would have been incredible out of character for her, and she wasn't a major character in the book anyway and she was in the movie a little too much to begin with.

Lhunardawen · 08-07-2004, 04:43 AM

All of Arwen's movie apparitions that did not happen in the book are not good. There's no saying which is worse. But then again, Arwen in Helm's Deep is a pretty scary thought.

Boromir88 · 08-07-2004, 08:46 AM

The fact that Arwen's fate was "tied" to the ring, is a sickly thought. It is true however, that everyone's fate is tied to the ring, but you don't have people falling deadly sick because of it. Now, you have Arwen who's "immortality" is beginning to fade but Elrond riding to Dunharrow made it seem like a "race against time" sort of thing. Like, ahhh if the Ring isn't destroyed soon Arwen will DIE!!! I mean everyone will die, eventually, if Sauron gets the ring but you don't got people falling sick because it wasn't destroyed.

I do have to agree, seeing Arwen at Helm's deep would have been a disaster, I might actually make her rescue of Frodo in FOTR, and make that above the "tied to the ring" because that again is extremely out of character. Jeez can't PJ get some love for GLORFINDEL!

elronds_daughter · 08-07-2004, 09:59 AM

Quote:

All of Arwen's movie apparitions that did not happen in the book are not good. There's no saying which is worse. But then again, Arwen in Helm's Deep is a pretty scary thought.

this is true.

Quote:

I mean everyone will die, eventually, if Sauron gets the ring but you don't got people falling sick because it wasn't destroyed.

also true. but haven't you forgotten Frodo? oh, wait. he wasn't really sick, just tired. there goes that argument. rats.

Quote:

can't PJ get some love for GLORFINDEL!

very true. Glorfindel was deprived of his one-and-only defining moment!! AND Arwen stole his glory!!!!

DEATH TO "ADVENTUROUS ARWEN"!!!!!!

Neferchoirwen · 08-07-2004, 11:06 AM

Arwen Warrior Princess is far more worse than Arwen the Lame. Actually, I'm happy that Arwen's physical strength stopped where it stopped in movie 1. Her will-I-stay-or-will-I-go dillema was stressful enough to begin with.

Encaitare · 08-07-2004, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Glorfindel was deprived of his one-and-only defining moment!!

True, trilogy-wise. But assuming there was only ever one Glorfindel, maybe if there's ever a Silm movie he could kick Balrog arse.

Now Arwen fighting a Balrog would be awful. ::vomits::

08-04-2004, 08:03 PM	#1
Boromir88 Laconic Loreman Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: USA Posts: 7,518	Which is worse? As we know, PJ thought about putting Arwen in at Helm's deep (thankfully that didn't happen). But, let's play a little what if, what if Arwen was at Helm's deep? Which do you think is worse, Arwen at Helms Deep, or Arwen's falling suddenly ill, and her fate being "tied" to the ring?

08-04-2004, 09:33 PM	#2
Morsul the Dark Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 3,448	I believe the present way is better I do however think Arwen at Helm's Deep would be easier to understand I didn't get it at all that her fate was tied to the rings why would it be? Although having her at helm's deep is more annoying after all Eowyn is the strong one __________________ Morsul the Resurrected

08-05-2004, 05:48 AM	#3
Meela Denethor's True Love Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Mirkwood. With Thranduil... swoon Posts: 2,049	Arwen is not a warrior. To have her at Helm's Deep would be against her typical character, and would look truly odd. Although having her fate in particular tied to the ring is out of place, at least it's something that could apply - every character is tied to the fate of the ring. __________________ 'The Hobbit' 1st impressions: 1. Thorin is hot... Oh god, I fancy a dwarf. 2. Thranduil is hotter. 3. Is that... Figwit! 4. Does Elijah Wood never age? 2nd: It's all about Fili & Kili, really. 3rd: BARD! OMG, Bard.

08-05-2004, 09:34 AM	#4
Eomer of the Rohirrim Auspicious Wraith Join Date: May 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 4,859	Meela's got it dead on. That line from Elrond wasn't meant to get the popcorn-munchers thinking about it in detail, it was merely to brainwash them into thinking Ring - Important! Arwen fighting at Helm's Deep would have been worse than some war atrocities. __________________ Los Ingobernables de Harlond

08-07-2004, 08:46 AM	#7
Boromir88 Laconic Loreman Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: USA Posts: 7,518	Replies The fact that Arwen's fate was "tied" to the ring, is a sickly thought. It is true however, that everyone's fate is tied to the ring, but you don't have people falling deadly sick because of it. Now, you have Arwen who's "immortality" is beginning to fade but Elrond riding to Dunharrow made it seem like a "race against time" sort of thing. Like, ahhh if the Ring isn't destroyed soon Arwen will DIE!!! I mean everyone will die, eventually, if Sauron gets the ring but you don't got people falling sick because it wasn't destroyed. I do have to agree, seeing Arwen at Helm's deep would have been a disaster, I might actually make her rescue of Frodo in FOTR, and make that above the "tied to the ring" because that again is extremely out of character. Jeez can't PJ get some love for GLORFINDEL!

08-06-2004, 02:28 PM	#5
Encaitare Bittersweet Symphony Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: On the jolly starship Enterprise Posts: 1,814	Wow, the whole fate tied to the ring thing was lame, but when I heard PJ almost had her come to Helms Deep I sighed in relief. It would have been incredible out of character for her, and she wasn't a major character in the book anyway and she was in the movie a little too much to begin with.

08-07-2004, 04:43 AM	#6
Lhunardawen Hauntress of the Havens Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: IN it, but not OF it Posts: 2,538	All of Arwen's movie apparitions that did not happen in the book are not good. There's no saying which is worse. But then again, Arwen in Helm's Deep is a pretty scary thought.

08-07-2004, 11:06 AM	#9
Neferchoirwen Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: RtR: 483.3 miles, Fords of Bruinen Posts: 512	Arwen Warrior Princess is far more worse than Arwen the Lame. Actually, I'm happy that Arwen's physical strength stopped where it stopped in movie 1. Her will-I-stay-or-will-I-go dillema was stressful enough to begin with. __________________ On really romantic nights of self, I go salsa dancing with my confusion. ~Speed Levitch http://crevicesofsilence.blogspot.com/