Gandalf Vs. The Witch King

[Galadriel]

Gandalf vs. The Witch King? I would have to say Gandalf, since he is a Maia and the Witch King is just a shadow. Sure, he's strong, but he's no match for Mithrandir! PJ made Gandalf look ludicrously weak. I cringed when I saw the way Gandalf fell off his horse and gave The Witch King that helpless look, as if he were saying 'Well. This is the end of me." He was resurrected by Iluvatar himself and he shakes at the sight of a Ringwraith?
And I agree with one of the above comments. In the movie, Eowyn makes Gandalf look like a pansy. Not that she isn't strong, but if she is NOT as strong as a demi-god, then they shouldn't make it seem like that.
I think Gandalf refused to show a good amount of his power. What he demonstrated in the books was like the tip of an iceberg. Maybe even less. After all, he DOES mention in The Two Towers that he is so powerful that practically no one could match him, except 'the one who sits in the Dark Tower'.
This is one of those areas that Tolkien has left very vague. It's another 'Tom Bombadil' scenario where one just doesn't know what to think. One is sure of something, but the rest is just plagued in a cloud, if you take my meaning.

[Rhino]

you all seem to forget that Gandalf alluded to the fact that the WK was more powerful then him when he was talking to Pippin before the battle of Osgiliath
his facial expression alone would be enough to tell that he is terrifed of WK, not only this but his hesitance or thought process before telling Pippin about the WK is another allusion to this.

Secondly, the scene was one of huge drama and tension, WKs' ability to destroy Gandalfs staff and deseat him from shadowfax is PJs' interpretation of the shear, raw power of WK, the fact that you are irked by a minor injustice done to Gandalf, is in itself an injustice to Peter Jackson.

Thirdly, Aragorns ability to defeat WK in the first film is clearly a foreshadowing of his true abilities/power which is revealed later in not only that film but throughout the trilogy.

One other thing, from my interpretation Gandalf is not the most powerful being in ME, that place being reseverved for Sauron (you can take that as you want, but I am simply alluding to the fact that Sauron was able to create such a device of evil and destruction in the form of the One Ring, and then "Come Back from the Dead" though I do not have words to truely give that a justifiyable explianation)
though Gandalf in clearly the wisest being in ME.

thats just a few things that irk me about most of your arguements,
I am not trying to belittle your opinions just present my veiw on the scene

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Rhino

you all seem to forget that Gandalf alluded to the fact that the WK was more powerful then him when he was talking to Pippin before the battle of Osgiliath
his facial expression alone would be enough to tell that he is terrifed of WK, not only this but his hesitance or thought process before telling Pippin about the WK is another allusion to this.

In PJ's world, a case may be made for Gandalf's 'terror' of the Witch-king, but that was not the indication from the book.

Originally Posted by Rhino

Secondly, the scene was one of huge drama and tension, WKs' ability to destroy Gandalfs staff and deseat him from shadowfax is PJs' interpretation of the shear, raw power of WK, the fact that you are irked by a minor injustice done to Gandalf, is in itself an injustice to Peter Jackson.

How, exactly, is questioning a film director's handling of a scene (which featured a misrepresentation of one of the most recognisable and beloved characters in the original work) an "injustice"?

[Rhino]

How, exactly, is questioning a film director's handling of a scene (which featured a misrepresentation of one of the most recognisable and beloved characters in the original work) an "injustice"

I just feel that he handled the scene well, and that so many seem to have negitive feelings towards it is unfair....injustice was the wrong word and I apologize for my mistake.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Rhino

I just feel that he handled the scene well, and that so many seem to have negitive feelings towards it is unfair....

Well, that would be your opinion, to which you are certainly entitled. However, my opinion differs drastically from yours, and your points neither move me nor do I feel it necessary to further quantify the opposing view, as I gave up redundancy for the New Year. That and liver.

[Nerwen]

Hey, stop picking on the newbie, you two.

[JoltFlame]

I hope for the closing of this long thread and the conclusion that the Black Rider indeed is superior to Gandalf, so is the tale told.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by JoltFlame

I hope for the closing of this long thread and the conclusion that the Black Rider indeed is superior to Gandalf, so is the tale told.

Repeating yourself doesn't make you right, particularly since you have lost the debate. I only mention that because it is one of those life lessons one must learn.

[Pitchwife]

Oh Morth, stop being so condescending and flaunting your old age wisdom, please. Even though you're right.

Originally Posted by JoltFlame

I hope for the closing of this long thread and the conclusion that the Black Rider indeed is superior to Gandalf, so is the tale told.

By Jackson, yes. By Tolkien, no.
Seriously, listen to this:

Originally Posted by Lotr Book V, The Siege of Gondor

'You cannot enter here', said Gandalf, and the huge shadow halted. 'Go back to the abyss prepared for you! Go back! Fall into the nothingness that awaits you and your Master. Go!'

Does he sound like he's dreading to be outmatched by a superior power? Does he sound like he's just making bold words and whistling in the dark? Or does he sound like he knows he's in for a confrontation that will demand all his strength but is confident that he will prevail?
At any rate he certainly doesn't sound like the pathetic excuse for an Istar PJ chose to show us.

[Inziladun]

In the books, Gandalf overthrew one of Morgoth's Balrogs, though his physical body died in the process.

In the books, the Witch-king was wounded by a Hobbit with a Barrow-blade, and finished off by a woman with an ordinary sword.

That was after Gandalf fought off all nine of the Nazgûl at once at Weathertop.

Now, PJ had things quite a bit different is his mind, but in Tolkien's world, it's Gandalf hands down.

[Galadriel]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

In the books, Gandalf overthrew one of Morgoth's Balrogs, though his physical body died in the process.

In the books, the Witch-king was wounded by a Hobbit with a Barrow-blade, and finished off by a woman with an ordinary sword.

That was after Gandalf fought off all nine of the Nazgûl at once at Weathertop.

Now, PJ had things quite a bit different is his mind, but in Tolkien's world, it's Gandalf hands down.

True that.

[alatar]

But like I've been told a billion times, PJ's adaptation is not exactly Tolkien's world. My problem, however, since that fateful day with the extended version of RotK came out, is that, even at first blush, PJ's world did not appear to be internally consistent.

Originally Posted by Inziladun

In the books, Gandalf overthrew one of Morgoth's Balrogs, though his physical body died in the process.

Note that it the movie it's just 'a Balrog,' though not just more than man-high. You'd think that taking down this creature, as we see in TTT, it'd count for something to Gandalf's credit.

In the books, the Witch-king was wounded by a Hobbit with a Barrow-blade, and finished off by a woman with an ordinary sword.

Note that in the movie, Merry's blade is not magical or extraordinary in any way, yet can still pierce the unseen sinews of the Witch-King.

That was after Gandalf fought off all nine of the Nazgûl at once at Weathertop.

Note that Aragorn chased five - FIVE - of them away (one of which was the Witch-King) from Weathertop using a non-Anduril sword and some fiery pieces of wood.

Now, PJ had things quite a bit different is his mind, but in Tolkien's world, it's Gandalf hands down.

But this is the movie section.

[Dakêsîntrah]

Let me add that I will give credit to Peter in at least trying to avoid the cliché depiction of the all mighty good guy wizard who fears nothing!

I mean, c'mon, since Tolkien's day, this has been portrayed at least a dozen times in other fantasy works and movies.

It would be about as interesting as Superman taking on the world minus the kryptonite!

This is why Batman's so much more immensely popular: Since his mortal flaws are sometimes exposed, it makes for an interesting showdown with the villains.

The old man is merely a suit of Olorin, the real being, and I could care less if the mortal body might be seen quailing.

To me, it's not a matter of who's superior, it's really an analysis on the nature of Olorin's body/spirit.

[alatar]

Originally Posted by Dakêsîntrah

Let me add that I will give credit to Peter in at least trying to avoid the cliché depiction of the all mighty good guy wizard who fears nothing!

That might have been a good idea had we not seen this same wizard fight a Balrog while falling through the earth.

I mean, c'mon, since Tolkien's day, this has been portrayed at least a dozen times in other fantasy works and movies.

Agreed, though I have two issues with that: (1) you *expect* a wizardly bearded figure to be the one to 'save the day,' (or at least I would say current culture might) and (2) this wizard is *Gandalf*, meaning that it's just not some generic wizard but one we know all about.

It would be about as interesting as Superman taking on the world minus the kryptonite!

Cool analogy! Have you ever seen the movie 'Superman II?' Regardless, Superman's weakness in that movie isn't kryptonite, but his feelings for the lowly humans that infest the planet. The three bad superbeings use Superman's attachment to Lois Lane to get at him.

Could anyone think of a way where we would avoid the wizard cliche, have Gandalf portrayed as powerfully as he is in the books *and* yet allow for his character not to overshine the story in this kryptoniteless world?

This is why Batman's so much more immensely popular: Since his mortal flaws are sometimes exposed, it makes for an interesting showdown with the villains.

That part was played by 'take off his head' Aragorn...

The old man is merely a suit of Olorin, the real being, and I could care less if the mortal body might be seen quailing.

But what about all of the 'drivel' he spouted to Pippin? About 'this' not being the end?

Originally Posted by Gandalf and Pip (from the RotK script)

ANGLE ON: GANDALF and PIPPIN sit on stone steps . . . Both covered in sweat and grime, bone-weary from fighting, spirits and hearts bruised . . .
PIPPIN looks towards the WOODEN GATES at which a NUMBER of SOLDIERS continue to build a BARRICADE . . .

PIPPIN
(quiet) I didn't think it would end this way . . .

GANDALF looks at the SMALL HOBBIT a beat.

GANDALF
(gently) End? No, the journey doesn't end here.

PIPPIN looks up at GANDALF, questioningly . . . .

GANDALF (cont'd)
Death is just another path, one that we all must take.

ANGLE ON: GANDALF looks down to see PIPPIN looking up at him with fear in his eyes . . .

GANDALF (cont'd)
(remembering) The grey rain curtain of this world rolls back and all turns to silver glass . . .
(to himself) and then you see it . . .

ANGLE ON: GANDALF breaks off, lost in reverie . . .

PIPPIN
What, Gandalf? See what?

GANDALF
White shores ... And beyond . . . A far green country under a swift sunrise.

PIPPIN stares up at the OLD WIZARD'S FACE, softened, quiet and full of peace . . .

PIPPIN
(quiet) Well, that isn't so bad.

GANDALF
(gently) No . . . No, it isn't.

BOOM!

ANGLE ON: GANDALF and PIPPIN'S faces turn as the WOODEN DOORS shudder under another BLOW.

Again, to me it's a matter of consistency. Either Gandalf believes what he said, and so would be at peace, or not.

[Ondoher420]

Gandalf was made to look ridiculously weak in front of the WK!!! What has Gandalf the White have to fear from the WK as he defeated the balrog in his grey form!! Surely Gandalf is very much powerful than the nazgul

[alatar]

And what of Dumbledore? I've not read the books, but I get the impression from the Harry Potter movies that, at any time, the wizard Dumbledore could step in and prevail in any situation that Harry or Hogwarts finds itself in.

And yet there always seems to be more than enough for Harry and friends to do.

[Dakêsîntrah]

Philippa Boyens and Fran Walsh on the Witch-king's reaction to Gandalf in the Extended Edition audio commentary:

Boyens: ["In the book it works on a different level...]

Walsh: ["There's something disempowering about a character who arrives and threatens to do something and then flies away again...Having not actually - well, he broke Gandalf's staff, but - there was just this sense...it made him less frightening..and less potent as a character. It's like an event written to happen, but then didn't. And we really felt it in the pacing of the film."]

Peter Jackson adds: ["We just wanted to make it more exciting and cinematic."]

So the idea of Jackson and Co. is to make the Witch-king more menacing. Give them credit; they tried to add something to the very little screentime the Witch-king was granted.

If they would have filmed the confrontation as it happened in the book, then it would have been a nearly wasteful bit of scenes. As a film director, why would you have one or two scenes of a book rendition of WK vs. Gandalf, building up even more tension than what was actually filmed, and then ending it with the two going separate ways with no actual outcome? Well, that's essentially how it happened in the book, but it certainly wouldn't carry any merit to advancing plot in a movie!

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Dakêsîntrah

If they would have filmed the confrontation as it happened in the book, then it would have been a nearly wasteful bit of scenes. As a film director, why would you have one or two scenes of a book rendition of WK vs. Gandalf, building up even more tension than what was actually filmed, and then ending it with the two going separate ways with no actual outcome? Well, that's essentially how it happened in the book, but it certainly wouldn't carry any merit to advancing plot in a movie!

You have the two commanders of the opposing armies set up against each other; but there's no need to have them fight each other one-on-one if it didn't happen in the book - and it didn't.

The plot doesn't lose anything if no blow is struck between them.

It's this type of thinking that had the director seriously considering wheeling out Sauron himself to fight Aragorn at the Black Gate.

[alatar]

If only I had stuck with the theater version!

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by alatar

If only I had stuck with the theater version!

I believe this thread to be a bewitched thing,
For it will not die a natural death;
Like Angmar's wraith crown-ed the cold Witch King,
Who for an age drew not a live man's breath.

Doeth!

[cfwmac007]

i believe the movie had a more accurate then people want to give. it is true both sauron and gandalf are maiar and so are balrogs and good ol' tom. sauron is far from the strongest of the maiar, but is the powerful in speech craft. the balrogs were the stronges of the maiar that came under the control of melkor. when sauron had the rings made tainted all but the 3 for the elves. sauron put is will and power into the ring so that his will would extend to the others that wore the other rings. 1000 years after sauron's defeat by last army of elves and men, the istari came to middle earth. the istari are 5 maiar sent by the valar to stop the coming great darkness. The istari are different than the other maiar that came to middle earth. The istari were limited to form of men and the powers that be found within the mortal world (talk about a handicap). Sauron does not have this limitation. The witch king was the most powerful of the witches even before given one of the nine. The ring would farther augment his ablities. to me in the books when gandalf tells pippen about the prophecy that he, in his heavily handicapped form, he did not seem to sure himself if he could defeat the witch-king. this comes from bestiary that david day put together, and it has an index to where to go in tolkiens works to find the information. i ready the lord of the rings more the twenty times (jurassic park i read almost 40 times). gandalf in middle earth is far from invincible and his body is still mortal. he did die after the fight with the belrog and in his words " he was sent back", this is also why he is a little confused when he is first called gandalf upon his return... you know like moving from one house to a bigger one, you still have everything (one hopes) you just got to find it again.

my biggest complaint was the lack of sam using the ring in the movies. in the book he uses the ring directly under sauron's nose, and sauron is none the wiser.

[skip spence]

Words well spoken, Morth!

And welcome to the downs, cfwmac007!

I believe you are mistaken though. Gandalf the Gray took down a Balrog single-handedly and when he was sent back his powers were enhanced. The Witch-King and four of his lieutenants couldn't even handle a midget and one dude with a stick.

[elronds_daughter]

Bravo, Morth! (Also, well said, skip.)

It's disconcerting at best to come back after a long absence from our beloved 'Downs and find a thread I opinionated in years ago still going. (Perhaps it makes me feel old, more than anything else.)

But, on topic, I don't think Jackson & Co. very properly represented Gandalf -- or the Witch King, for that matter. True, he was rather a menace, but how much of a threat was he, really, pitted against a Maia? The Witch King, evil and menacing though he was, was only a man. Faded to wraith or no, he was still not much more than human. True, he had one of the Nine, but Gandalf had one of the Three. The odds were pretty stacked against the poor WK. Scary as he was, he was just not as inherently powerful as PJ wanted to make him out to be.

Anyway, that's my two cents. Again.

[Edit: It's also a little disconcerting to find that some of the original posters no longer exist on the 'Downs...]

[cfwmac007]

this is taken directectly from david day's bestiary

" the most terrible o th the maiar spirits who became servants of melkor, the dark enemy, were those who were transformed into demons. in the high elven tongue they were named the valaraukar, but in middle-earth were called balrogs."

gandalf does not have an easy fight for they fight from the deepest parts of moria to the peak of Zirakzigil.

Taken from appendix b at the back of the return of the king,
"23 gandalf pursues the balrog to the peak of zirakzigil.
25 he cast down the balrog, and passes away. his body lies on the peak.

february
14 the mirror of galadriel. gandalf returns to life and lies in a trance."

also in appendix b

"the istari... were messengers sent to contest the power of sauron, and to unite all those who had the will to resit him: but they were forbidden to match his power with power, or to seek to dominate elves or men by force and fear."

even after being sent back he is still heavily restricted. they don't want to replace one tyrant with another, remember the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by cfwmac007

this is taken directectly from david day's bestiary

Sorry Mac, but David Day is about as reliable as a drunken, one-eyed night watchman...in the fog.

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Sorry Mac, but David Day is about as reliable as a drunken, one-eyed night watchman...in the fog.

But only when said watchman has an eye-infection?

First time I've heard this guy mentioned, actually. Who is he?

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

But only when said watchman has an eye-infection?

First time I've heard this guy mentioned, actually. Who is he?

In the unlikely, but not entirely impossible case that you're not kidding, see here.

To be fair, the quote cfwmac007* gave is not that terribly off the mark, but in general, I think Morth has described Day's reliability very well. I guess the success of his books is largely due to Day's undeniable talent for recruiting good illustrators.
I still own a copy of his Bestiary - in German translation to boot, which was obviously made by someone who hadn't read Tolkien's original books - , and while the pictures are mostly gorgeous, the text suffers from a curious mix of simplification and personal speculation passed off as fact.


*Welcome to the Downs, by the way! With a name like that, I first took you for one of the spambots who have been haunting this place in ever-increasing flocks recently. Glad to see I was mistaken; enjoy being dead!

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

Thanks Pitch. Can't imagine how I enjoyed Tolkien without this guy to help me.

[cfwmac007]

lol i get that often. so of the quites i used come directly out of the appendex of the lord of the rings at end of the return of the king. i cant find my simerilian for additional quotes. the ones that sent the istari wanted to avoid making another sauron and is why they were restricted in abilites. had gandalf had full use of his power he could mop the floor with WK and he would not even have to blink, but gandalf is basically fighting with two arms and a leg tied behind his back with a bad toe fungus on the remaining foot. its a shame the oh j r r is not here himself... or even chris

[narfforc]

Originally Posted by Eomer of the Rohirrim

But only when said watchman has an eye-infection?

First time I've heard this guy mentioned, actually. Who is he?

I actually met him at Oxomoot many years ago, mad as a march hare. He was asked to leave after annoying everybody with his latest attempts at latching on to the works of Tolkien. He was adamant that some kind of Bible Code could done with numbers in Tolkiens books...ie:- one ....nine.....seven.....three are the rings....what year did Tolkien die?....1973...there was lots more, I've never seen any news of his book since.

[Pitchwife]

Originally Posted by narfforc

He was adamant that some kind of Bible Code could done with numbers in Tolkiens books...ie:- one ....nine.....seven.....three are the rings....what year did Tolkien die?....1973

*jawdrop*
Gosh, he's right! I never noticed that!
Moreover, the numbers of the rings add up to 20, and most of LoTR was written at 20 Northmoor Road. It all makes sense now...

[elronds_daughter]

Originally Posted by Pitchwife

It all makes sense now...

If things keep going this direction, this might need to be moved to Mirth...

[Galadriel]

Originally Posted by narfforc

I actually met him at Oxomoot many years ago, mad as a march hare. He was asked to leave after annoying everybody with his latest attempts at latching on to the works of Tolkien. He was adamant that some kind of Bible Code could done with numbers in Tolkiens books...ie:- one ....nine.....seven.....three are the rings....what year did Tolkien die?....1973...there was lots more, I've never seen any news of his book since.

Oh wow O.O I never noticed that!

[Sarumian]

Originally Posted by cfwmac007

i believe the movie had a more accurate then people want to give. it is true both sauron and gandalf are maiar and so are balrogs and good ol' tom. sauron is far from the strongest of the maiar, but is the powerful in speech craft.

As I remember, in Silmarion Sauron is named the most powerful and dreadful servant of Melkor. Cant provide a quote, so may be I am wrong...

Originally Posted by cfwmac007

The istari are different than the other maiar that came to middle earth. The istari were limited to form of men and the powers that be found within the mortal world (talk about a handicap). Sauron does not have this limitation.

It doesn't look they were limited to that extent. They looked like men and they suffered like men; they were, however, so vigorous that could survive conditions that no man was able to, their life span looked unlimited. They could be killed, but this is the case for everyone in mortal lands. Like High Elves, they could see what happens in both worlds, I'm sure. In the end, it looks, they were not deprived of their inherent magic powers, but were strictly recommended not to use them unless they needed to save the day or themselves. Let me remind you Gandalf's fireworks at Weathertop and in Hollin, where he fighted against the Nazgul and wargs respectively. Another case is Gandalf's struggle with the Balrog in the Chamber of Mazarbul. That was perhaps the only direct encounter of two magic powers described in LOTR (though it doesn't happen in the movie); Gandalf described it with the words 'I have met my match' - even before he had learned it was the Balrog. And can you mention other man slaying a Balrog?

Istari were also advised not to attempt encountering the Enemy in person or becoming Lords to peoples of ME. I tend to think that apart from their bodily hardships all other restrictions Istari carried out themselves; for that reason they were capable of violating these limitations. In other words, Istari were not stripped of their inherent Mayar powers.

Originally Posted by cfwmac007

The witch king was the most powerful of the witches even before given one of the nine.

Was he? I thought he was the most powerful of kings and became a witch under the power of his ring.

Originally Posted by cfwmac007

The ring would farther augment his ablities. to me in the books when gandalf tells pippen about the prophecy that he, in his heavily handicapped form, he did not seem to sure himself if he could defeat the witch-king.

This is correct, but let's look at possible reasons. First of all, Gandalf would have never said 'I will win' before the battle was over. Simply because he was a wise one. Secondly, in accord with the limitations, imposed on Istari, he preferred to keep public unaware of his real abilities. Who would have taken seriously and watched closely strange activities of a nosy old man, the Master of Fireworks? His humility proved to be a perfect disguise; it helped, for instance, against the Balrog, who otherwise could have postponed a direct attack and would have probably tried to exhaust Gandalf by means of magic or used orcs' aid.

Thirdly, Witch King was a very difficult opponent not just because he wielded great powers, but because he was invincible for ordinary arms. Merry's sword was the only blade on Pelenor Fields which was able to undo the spell sealed in a ring (one of The Nine). I wonder if Pippin had a similar dagger but Gandalf couldn't have known anyway. That doesn't mean Gandalf was incapable of dealing with the sorcery. Four of The Seven were destroyed in dragons' fire; one of The Nine could have been destroyed similarly and I think, Gandalf was able to generate the heat he needed to penetrate the protection, even at the price of self-exhaustion. May be he would have found some other way, but not an easy one.

Things were even more ghastly at the moment of the encounter for two reasons. Gandalf definitely didn't wish to set Minas Tirith ablaze. Also Witch King was leading a huge army and could have easily find some aid, while Gandalf was alone and couldn't expect an honest single combat.

All this means Witch King was a perilous opponent for Gandalf. The actual fight, nevertheless, didn't occur in the book, and Gandalf prevailed by the means of counsel and encouraging. Neither does the fight happen in the film. Instead WK needs just one flash to throw Gandalf the White from his stead and break his staff - an efficiency that requires a power of Vallar if not Eru.

Originally Posted by cfwmac007

my biggest complaint was the lack of sam using the ring in the movies. in the book he uses the ring directly under sauron's nose, and sauron is none the wiser.

That's a good point.

[Cirdan]

Originally Posted by elronds_daughter

The Witch King, evil and menacing though he was, was only a man. Faded to wraith or no, he was still not much more than human. True, he had one of the Nine, but Gandalf had one of the Three. The odds were pretty stacked against the poor WK.

I don't have much to add to this subject (which appears to have been flogged to death and beyond) but this is a good point. Though the Elven rings were not weapons, Narya's ability to grant courage is directly counter to the Nazgul's chief weapon -fear ...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... their two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Their *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to Sauron.... Their *four*...no... *Amongst* their weapons.... Amongst their weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again.

NOBODY expects the Nazgul! Amongst their weaponry are such diverse elements as: fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to Sauron, and nice black uniforms - Oh damn!

[aiea]

Originally Posted by Essex

Just to let you know, I've added a post to the Book section, Gandalf's staff, to put forward my point that the WK breaking Gandalf's staff can be seen as not that big a problem for the Wizard. Again, for the umpteenth time, I'm not condoning PJ doing this to the scene, I'm just stating that a Wizard's staff isn't the be all and end all of his powers. Take a look at the Gandalf's Staff thread if you're interested in my views at all...................

I had read just till here, but wish give my 2 cents too.

In the movie G the white is more differentiated from the grey than in the book.
Now we know that Gandalf etymology means a man (elf) with a stuff.
But gandalf the grey is dead at moria.
When G talk with Aragorn he remembered that his OLD name was Gandalf.
When he went Edoras he ask (winkling) to not separate a OLD man from his support...
Then he meet Saruman and Orthanc and break his staff (not a magic trick, but the simple truth of the will of the Valar.
Now G become really Saruman the white for what this means.
In the movie he used the staff to scare the nazgul-
Now why the With King is able to break the staff of G the White in the movie ? ( i find it to help to give resistance to the weariness of changes in movie )
Because G non need it anymore ! Because the Old wizard is dead and lives just the Light. And if some Old in G still lives (as in us watcher that wish he put down the Witch King with one of his fire/tricks) that has to be broken.
What we believe fear in G eyes is just the understanding of this truth. And that the evil has to bring it is one another truth.
And it is no case, but again providence that Rohan come now.
This is the reason why we not see a Witch King stroke Gandalf
... because there are Bigger Powers at Work and W. King is just a mean too...
You (and me) not like that the time of elves has to end and come the time of men (or Orcs as very well spoke Gothmog)
but that is written in Iluvatar theme...
The Witch King has to be defeated by a NEW man (this means Glorfindel prophecy) that has his value in Love etc.
This is what convince Faramir ,the truth of the Sam Gangee words.
So I believe Tolkien could forgive Peter J also if he betrayed him 3 times !

[alatar]

aiea, interesting take on the movie, and Welcome to the Downs!

Originally Posted by aiea

Now why the With King is able to break the staff of G the White in the movie ? ( i find it to help to give resistance to the weariness of changes in movie )
Because G non need it anymore ! Because the Old wizard is dead and lives just the Light. And if some Old in G still lives (as in us watcher that wish he put down the Witch King with one of his fire/tricks) that has to be broken.

I think that your interpretation of the 'Gandalf vs Witch King' scene would be more believable if Gandalf, lying on the ground, did not look so fearful.

[Aragrax]

Originally Posted by aiea

I had read just till here, but wish give my 2 cents too.
Now why the With King is able to break the staff of G the White in the movie ? ( i find it to help to give resistance to the weariness of changes in movie )
Because G non need it anymore ! Because the Old wizard is dead and lives just the Light. And if some Old in G still lives (as in us watcher that wish he put down the Witch King with one of his fire/tricks) that has to be broken.
What we believe fear in G eyes is just the understanding of this truth. And that the evil has to bring it is one another truth.
And it is no case, but again providence that Rohan come now.
This is the reason why we not see a Witch King stroke Gandalf
... because there are Bigger Powers at Work and W. King is just a mean too...
!

A wizard w/o his staff is less than a wizard. A wizard whose staff is broken is less than a man. Breaking Gandalf's staff would have pretty much ended Gandalf, even with him having Narya (the source of his fire skills, most likely, as well as courage and firey temper); he would have had naught but his own skills, that of a philologist (hmmm).

Gandalf would not simply have "not needed" the staff, as it was repeatedly implied that their staff was the only way an Istar (but not all Maiar: witness Melian and her "Girdle" [ring]) could excercise power, as that power **WAS NOT THEIRS**. Istari *served* the Secret Fire; they could fan it, but they did not own it. A wizard's (linear) staff was probably a projection of that radiated power of creation *which comes from above* like rays from the sun, as opposed to rings, which represent the binding of things that are already created. This was not symbolic, as JRRT hated allegory, but would have been literal.

Without the staff as a link back home, a wizard was implied to only have that strength which was their own (in the mortal forms they had been clothed in) and, like Prospero found when he released Ariel, this wasn't much. Remember that Saruman turned against the light, so was already fallen and powerless, reliant on *science* (a thing clearly un-favored by JRRT) for his progress, *even before his staff was broken*. He summoned no storms over Caradhras in the book (that was either the mountain itself, or the Balrog), had no "Matrix" telekinetic battles w/Gandalf (it is implied that orcs took G to the top of Isengard), and used only eugenics (if breeding orcs can be considered EUgenics), bombs, and verbal manipulation/propaganda within our literary sight. These skills are not the true power, but rather the "New Way" of "accursed" science, as shown by "Saruman of Many Colours"; when the white light was broken (refracted) Gandalf said that "it is not wisdom to break a thing to see how it works". The original, natural, source light was preferred by Gandalf to the refracted differentiation of the prying mind; "I liked white better" he said. This was a KEY moral lesson of JRRT, and pretty much nowhere to be found in the (tech-driven/special-effects-laden) movies. Thus Saruman's staff was broken, and he was, in the end, a dark wisp of nothing on the wind.

*************

@cfwmac007

Tom Bombadil was almost certainly not a Maiar, as he was FAR, FAR older than pretty much everything else in Arda. Likely he was an Ainur or, perhaps, he might even have been Iluvatar himself, dwelling (in an intentionally limited scope) in his creation for a bit, tho JRRT claimed otherwise (JRRT said Tom wasn't God, at any rate).

***************

@ Sarumian

Glorfindel dropped a 'Rog too. And died for it, just like G. And just like G (tho it was due to JRRT realizing he had Glor alive in LotR after he had him dying in TS) he was brought back to continue to serve.

****************

@ any here who posted in the past wondering why the WK did not fly over the wall in the books, and criticizing JRRT's reasoning (!?!?). . . Last I read LotR, Fell Beasts were clearly *not indestructable*, so a fell beast with a flight of arrows in its breast would become a FELLED beast, and the Nazgul atop it would be sent "winging" back to Mordor *without* a mount to provide those wings. Overflights of a wall topped with 1000 archers would do naught but to leave the ringwraith in need of a renewed form after a 100 ft fall. PJ simply misrepresented the evil "winged taxis" as armored fighter-bombers in the films, thus created a logical inconsistancy all by himself; JRRT never had any illogic here.

****************

AFAIC, dramatic tension could have been adequately served by focusing a lot of sound and fury into the scene. Shouting and waving of arms goes a long way *with the right direction*! Words of Power and Terror, and all that. Besides, is it not far more British to understate things? Just a tad?

****************

JRRT repeatedly took great pains to make these things clear, but PJ regularly ignored JRRT in toto, hearing the cacophanous shouting of his own subcreation in his head, and thus drowning out JRRT's quiet wisdom set silently upon the page. One might say the radiated creation of the books was obscured by the ringing shadow and twisted dark fire of PJ's rewrites.

Not exactly a fan of the films, as you can see, tho I liked some things that were done, and even have RotK on DVD (as it seemed the most faithful in the theatrical release, and was well paced).

Not sure if I find the Sauron vs. Aragorn fight worse than the Gandalf staff break, but both deserved to be left in that Dead Marsh called the Cutting Room Floor.

[Nerwen]

Welcome to the Downs, Aragrax!

Truly, you have chosen a thread of epic grandeur in which to make your first post!

[sassyfriend]

I liked it cause it showed Gandalf truely cared for Pippin