Movie Characters Revisited: Gandalf

[Boromir88]

We will kick off with Gandalf, who isn't the main protagonist of the films, but he's been part of perhaps one of the most expansive discussions of the Movies forum. (see: Gandalf vs. The Witch-King)

A few things about Gandalf really stood out to me that I sort of just noticed, or if I did notice before I didn't give any added though to.

I'm not sure how to explain it, but as much as I think Ian McKellan is a very good Gandalf (an excellent Magneto though ), there was something missing in his performance. Something more than some of the character changes like his mauling on Denethor or fight with the Witch-King. I don't know who else could have been casted for the role, and I'm not even sure I would want someone else other than Sir Ian, but something is lacking in his performance as Gandalf.

I think he is rather an ideal Gandalf the Grey. He is the scolding, temperamental "grandpa" when Hobbits are acting stupid: "Confounded old Samwise Gamgee! Have you been eavesdropping!" And the famous "Fool of a Took! Throw yourself in next time!" Yet, friendly, and the comforting mentor when he has to be (think of his convo with Frodo in the Mines of Moria, or when we first meet driving a wagon on the way to Bilbo's). Gandalf's friendly, warm demeanor when we first meet him is contrasted nicely with the scene in Bag End with Bilbo. There, for the first time, we see Gandalf isn't all laughs and famous for fireworks: "Bilbo Baggins! Do not take me for some conjuror of cheap tricks!"

So, I have very little bad to say about Ian McKellan as Gandalf the Grey. However, I think the slightly-off feelings come as Gandalf the White. I don't know what's missing, so maybe I'm just imagining it. But, he doesn't have the aura, and inspiration as Gandalf the White, like I expected. He hasn't "raised in stature" upon being "sent back," but seems to have actually lost some of his gravitas.

And secondly, I took note of how different Gandalf treats Theoden and Denethor. With Theoden, Gandalf goes into an advisor's role. He counsels Theoden, but ultimately lets Theoden make his own decisions. With Denethor, however, Gandalf becomes far more assertive, to the point where he takes authority over the Steward, with command of Gondor's forces. I'm wondering why Jackson (and co.) would want to portray Gandalf treating the two rulers differently, and if there is also a noticeable difference in the books, with the way Gandalf treats them?

Of course, feel free to discuss pretty much whatever you noticed about Gandalf, the scripting of the role, a/o Mckellan's portrayal. These were just a few things I thought about and had me curious, to serve as starting points. (I hope I wasn't too wordy for this introductory post )

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I'm not sure how to explain it, but as much as I think Ian McKellan is a very good Gandalf (an excellent Magneto though ), there was something missing in his performance. Something more than some of the character changes like his mauling on Denethor or fight with the Witch-King. I don't know who else could have been casted for the role, and I'm not even sure I would want someone else other than Sir Ian, but something is lacking in his performance as Gandalf.

First off, very much agreed about McKellan and Magneto. "Mr. Laurio, never trust a beautiful woman, especially one who's interested in you."

I'm going on not very near recollections of the movies right now, so I'm going to make it a point to watch them again (shudder). Anyway, to me , the Gandalf from the books did not translate well. The movies have him yo-yoing between the two extremes you mention: kindly old grandpa on the one hand, and crotchety "You darned kids, with your loud music and skateboards!" on the other.

And do you know, one of the scenes that really bugs me is the first one in LOTR, where Gandalf drives up and hugs Frodo. Yes, it's sweet, but it just isn't a "Gandalf thing".

I also don't like the "Is it secret? Is it safe?" He looks so darned wild-eyed there, as if he's about to start raving about conspiracy theories involving Lobelia Sackville-Baggins being Sauron in disguise, or something.

I wonder though how much of that is McKellan's fault, and how much is at the door of the scriptwriters.

Originally Posted by Boromir88

So, I have very little bad to say about Ian McKellan as Gandalf the Grey. However, I think the slightly-off feelings come as Gandalf the White. I don't know what's missing, so maybe I'm just imagining it. But, he doesn't have the aura, and inspiration as Gandalf the White, like I expected. He hasn't "raised in stature" upon being "sent back," but seems to have actually lost some of his gravitas.

I get that too. He actually seems more nervous and uncertain. The Gandalf the White in the books did know fear, but he didn't cower in front of the Witch-king.

[Galadriel55]

I agree about Gandalf being the two extremes. I like him better as the Grey.

Originally Posted by Boro

And secondly, I took note of how different Gandalf treats Theoden and Denethor.

But they are different people. In the movies, Gandalf's assertiveness in Minas Tirith is a tad overdone. In the book, though, Denethor starts it.

And since I haven't watched the movies in over a half a year, I'll talk a bit about a detail I do remember about Gandalf. He said the famous words, which are now a meme, on the Bridge of Khazad-Dum:

You shall not pass!

We all remember these words in this exact way. But the book has it differently. In the book, Gandalf cries

You cannot pass!

There are two main differences between "shall not" and "cannot". The first is a promise/prophecy in future tense, the second is a fact in present tense. Other than that, there's not much of a difference.

Why did the movie script change it? What's wrong with "cannot"?

And, funny thing, we all remember the movie version better than the book. Why? Does it sould more powerful? Is it the visual effect of that staff raised above Gandalf's head which comes crashing down a moment later? Which one is it for you?

(This is actually a question I've been meaning to ask somewhere for some time now. I'm genuinely curious about what people think)

[Nogrod]

Alongside Ian Holm I think Ian McKellen was both the best casted actor in the movies as well as the best actor. Surprise, surprise, they are both old school theater actors. They were professionals.

A moment from the beginning of the first movie still makes me feel specially good: when Gandalf meets Bilbo and and kneels to look at him in the eye - and they have the close-up on Gandalf's eyes "studying" Bilbo's eyes. There is such a compassion, love and concern that it really melts one's heart. And McKellen has supposedly played it facing a stunt-actor (the size-double), not to his friend Mr. Holm. That I would call professionalism!

Anyway. He is great as Gandalf the Grey.

But like many have said, he's not that great as Gandalf the White. With which I don't mean he's not good in that role as well, but I just think he's not that good. There is some assertiviness or strength he lacks in that role.

Boro mentioned that scene with him getting angry with Bilbo: "Do not take me for some conjuror of cheap tricks!". It is actually one of my least favourite scenes with Gandalf - because of the lousy special-effects (the worst is Galadriel turning under that spell at the Mirror...). It makes one laugh more than take it seriously... which kind of spoils the athmosphere.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

But like many have said, he's not that great as Gandalf the White. With which I don't mean he's not good in that role as well, but I just think he's not that good. There is some assertiviness or strength he lacks in that role.

He lacks the air of wisdom and authority. It's like he has to prove it, instead of just having it.

[Formendacil]

There's a passage in The Two Towers, that talks about the difference between Gandalf the Grey and Gandalf the White, which illuminates how I feel Gandalf should have been characterised:

Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien, "The Palantír"

"Can I? But he's close, isn't he? Not changed at all."
"Oh yes, he is!" said Merry, waking up a little, and beginning to wonder what was bothering his companion. "He has grown, or something. He can be both kinder and more alarming, merry and more solemn than before, I think. He has changed; but we have not had a chance to see how much, yet.

To put it in my own words, rather than Meriadoc's, Gandalf the White should be just like Gandalf the Grey, but more so. Being returned to his corporeal form by Ilúvatar doesn't make Gandalf "less worldly" or anything of that sort; rather, it makes him more real. And therein lies the real problem with Gandalf the Movie-White for me--he comes across as "other worldly" or "ethereal," and the problem with being "ethereal" is that you are made of ether--not solid.

Mind you, agreeing with Meriadoc, it's not that Gandalf hasn't changed--he has. Perhaps the best analogy, though, is a description of Glorfindel from earlier in the LotR:

Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien, "Many Meetings"

And here in Rivendell there live still some of his chief foes: the Elven-wise, lords of the Eldar from beyond the furthest seas. They do not fear the Ringwraiths, for those who have dwelt in the Blessed Realm live at once in both worlds, and against both the Seen and the Unseen they have great power."
"I thought that I saw a white figure that shone and did not grow dim like the others. Was that Glorfindel then?"
"Yes, you saw him for a moment as he is upon the other side: one of the mighty of the Firstborn.

Granted, this isn't a perfect analogy, since we have the benefit of seeing Gandalf only in this realm, not in the other realm that the Ring gave Frodo access to, but "against both the Seen and the Unseen they have great power" should apply to Gandalf as well--and movie-White Gandalf felt skewed only to the "the other side" to me.

Which is hugely ironic if you consider that he seems to be much less effective against the Witch-King in the Movies... but perhaps that only goes to show that power in BOTH realms is necessary.

For the most part, I think this is the fault of the writing rather than of McKellan. Or perhaps even less the writing and more the special effects--Gandalf is sort of "glowed-out" rather than sharpened by being upgraded to The White.