Arwen

[Zippo]

Well i was watching the Today Show on NBC and they had an interview with Liv Tyler. Now the interview was going great untill Mat Said something like," Your a smaller part in this movie, but you will be playing a more Predominant role in the second movie, correct?" And Liv I believe Says, "that is correct".....Now how is that because, to my knowledge Arwen isnt even mentioned in the second book, and looking in the index of the Return of the King not even ONCE! So I have yet to realize how she can have a BIGGER part when she isnt in the second book at all! So if any one has any thing to say to clarify this it would be greatly appreicated. Thanks.

[Pirotess]

No NO <B>NOOOOOOOO</B>!!!!!!<BR>Please tell me that it's not true.<P>crap. this whole Arwen thing just keeps getting better, doesn't it? <BR>bah.

[Eol]

That is what I heard also..in a different interview. The producer wants to stretch the Arwen-Aragon saga through all three movies. This makes me very disapointed that they think they need to exaggorate the romance and change elements completely(when it is NOT necessary) in order to sell the movie. Reality, they have a strong audiance...but I suppose movie makers and actors get greedy.

[shieldmaiden]

Well i think that I've read that she was supposed to fight at Helm's deep but it just didn't work out but she'll still be there (probably not fighting). I've also read that she's supposed to heal a Rohirrim woman named Morwen(?).

[Meriadoc1961]

By the way, Arwen is mentioned in Return of the King. Remember the wedding of King Elessar?<P>I am hoping they will only add more of Arwen in flashback scenes showing her with Aragorn in courtship scenes, maybe as an encouragement to Aragorn to kep on his burdensome task. That would not be too bad, but I do not want her at Helm's Deep. I can just barely swallow having her at the Ford of Bruinen.

[Zippo]

I agree With Meriadoc1961 If she just HAS to be in it that would be the way I would prefer it. Thanks Guys for confirming what I heard...as much as I hate it...

[Rhudladion]

Hullo! I am new here, so if these comments are old school bare with me.<BR> I am a member of a fairly selective group of guys that meet about once a month to drink beer, smoke pipes, and talk about the LOTR. Each member of the group is at least currently on his second reading, with some of the members having read it over 10 times (these we call lore-masters). <BR> To get to the point: we are split about 50/50 on the Arwen issue, the main disagreement being over the Ford scene. Half our group says Arwen simply should not be there. The other half are of the opinion that movies and books are different medium and must therefore be treated differently. With the consideration that a one to one ratio between the movie and the book could not be achieved, what are all of your opinions on the matter?<P>My opinion: I have heard that in response to criticism about the scene, Jackson says he is being true to the "spirit" of the LOTR. I think he must have read a different LOTR. There is NO WAY that Arwen would run down to the Ford so near to Rivendell where plenty of Elven warriors dwelt and face the Nine by herself! I mean give me a break! Elven females were adored...not weak...but protected. I just think it's blatant abuse to the spirit of the LOTR. Anyone agree???<P>Rhudladion

[Eol]

I would strongly agree with you on Arwen does not belong at the Ford. The way she is describe in the book- first one and the third, she would rather be in the comforts of her own home and be a support and run things as a ruler or potentional ruler rather than wieling a sword and fighting, there are plenty of warriors to do that.<P>second thought: someone made the comment previously that needed to save the money by dropping smaller characters, thus saving money and giving the additional parts to "Arwen". I would agrue against that- it would have been better if they hired a no-name actress who would have not been able to ask for much and kept Glorifeld(forgive my spelling!) and it would have been fine and spent the same amount of money. <P>third: I will keep this brief, but I have a big issue about adding new characters when preexsisting characters would have sufficed! Example would be this Lurtz character. I will stop here.

[Rhudladion]

Please provide more on this Lurtz charater. This is new to me. ...and thanks for the response on the Arwen issue.<P>Elrond: "Hey Arwen, could you go down to the Ford and help the Halfling out? I could send Glorfindel, but there are only Nine of them."

[Eol]

From what I know about this Lurtz character is he is an orc who was assigned to murder Frodo. Purely for the movie- collectible stuff- no where to be found in books. I think this is pretty cheap! If you are curious- type in Lurtz on google and see what I am talking about.<P>Arwen " Sure, just let me get my armour back from Xena in the studio next door."<p>[ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: Eol ]

[Meriadoc1961]

I certainly do not like expanding characters for a movie just for the movie's sake. I also agree that it would be better to have cast no-name actresses and saved money just to keep the movie the same as the book.<P>Now if it is true that they have developed a whole new character, an orc, just to hunt down Frodo, why, that is simply ridiculous! There were at least two orcs involved with hunting Frodo and Sam while they were in Mordor. Why not just use them instead of creating more?<P>So much for my theory that they expanded the part of Arwen to save money paying for other actors, thereby eliminating Bombadil and Glorfindel.<P>Well, I have my tickets for tomorrow's matinee. I believe I will be happy with it. I certainly hope I will not be proven wrong. I am taking my wife so I can at least get an outside opinion. She has never read the whole trilogy, giving up on it about 10 years ago at the Council of Elrond. She just could not get past that chapter! However, even her opinion might be somewhat colored since she has heard my take on expanding the part of Arwen, in addition to my general disappointment at the selections of Liv Tyler and Kate Blanchette for the parts of Arwen and Galadriel.

I would much rather see Glorfindel "in the elf Lord's full fury" at the Ford of Bruinen. But I can understand, as much as I disaprove of the idea, why they did it. They had already cast Liv Tyler as Arwen, and wanted to simply expand her part because she was Liv Tyler. She is not a teriible Arwen though I find her anoying when she's talking about the movie. I won't mind terribly, even though it IS a little strange that she would be down there to help them. I'm going to look at it with an open mind

[Zippo]

When i first Saw the Lurtz Toy at EB I was only half way through the first book so i didnt know if he was in it or not, nOt that i have completed all of them i looked in the index for Lurtz..Of Course i didnt find one, i was greatly dissipointed when i found out he was made specifically for the movie...<BR>of course i still am....

[Eol]

Well PJ has two strikes against him with what he has done with Arwen and this Lurtz thing...the only thing saving him is the fact he did an AWSOME job with the hobbits. I would say he did a good job on the elves...but I have no real comment execpt that Agent Smith as Elrond is a little too weird for me. <P>Matrix mets Tolkien...hmmm I can only show the door Frodo, but you have to open it.

[Elrian]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Eol:<BR><STRONG>Well PJ has two strikes against him with what he has done with Arwen and this Lurtz thing...the only thing saving him is the fact he did an AWSOME job with the hobbits. I would say he did a good job on the elves...but I have no real comment execpt that Agent Smith as Elrond is a little too weird for me. <P>Matrix mets Tolkien...hmmm I can only show the door Frodo, but you have to open it. </STRONG><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Don't go there dude! He's been in more movies than the Matrix, and is the perfect actor for the part.

[Zippo]

I agree with the Lurtz Character..He is pretty dumb did they even say his name? ONCE?! Geez....

[Beregond]

Yeah, I couldn't help thinking of the Matrix when I saw Elrond.

[Eol]

Thank You...Beregond<BR>Someone agrees with me!

I think the movie is as good as it could be. Giving Arwen a larger part to build the love story between her and Aragorn was the right thing to do, because the affair is quite important to Tolkien’s mythology, and to the movie. We couldn’t just have the King of Mankind merry some strange elf we didn’t know anything about, so she must be introduced properly. Not that she is introduced any better in the books, but those who have read the Silmarillion would know the importance and background of her marrying Aragorn. But if she gets an even bigger part in The two Towers, that would be pushing it a bit far. About this Lurtz character, I think we should wait to see his part before judging anyone. If he has a whole new revolutionary part it would be tragic, but I don’t think he will. We will just have to wait and see.

[Zippo]

Well I CAN judge i have seen the movie and lurtz just dies, like i said in another post, i dont believe saruman ever says his name. Now I might be wrong, But im pretty sure.

I think that the introduction of Lurtz was a good thing indeed for the movie. He gave the orcs a face. He gave us someone to commonly dislike. Like when Boromir died, we were able to say "NO!!!!, YOU KILLED BOROMIR!!!" It wasn't some nameless orc we'll never see again, it was lurtz, and we all hated him for it.<P>As for Arwen, I only had one problem with her, and ill try to describe it to you, although i may misconstrue the truth. <BR>Ok, here goes.<BR>Glorfindel, the elf that rescues Frodo in the book shines in a white aura type thing reulting from his emotions about frodo being caught by the nazgul. The reason he was able to shine like he did was because he had seen the light of Valinor, and it was shining through him. <BR>Arwen, however, shines in the same manner in the movie. She was born in middle earth and had never seen Valinor in all its splendor. Thus, she should not have been able to help Frodo in that manner

[Elrian]

That's a very good point about Arwen shining, she had never seen the light of the Two Trees in Valinor, and it was one dress in the shining, another when she stopped shining, and different colors at that. Dream sequence?

[The Barrow-Wight]

I gave some thoughts on Arwen's role in the next two films here: <A HREF="http://www.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=000249" TARGET=_blank>http://www.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=4&t=000249</A> and didn't want to clutter the board by repeating them.

My goodness, the fact that Arwen is to be in the movies even more just irritates me! Perhaps the movies would suffice the way they are if only to get people who see the movie to read the books. That would be good.<BR>I think a great deal too many things were changed or taken out, but alot of it was still very close to the way I imagined it, such as Moria. I guess movies always will be different when taken from the books. I still liked it over all.

[Elrian]

We still don't know what will end up on the cutting room floor yet either, I guess maybe PJ doesn't even know himself yet. It the waiting to see thats going to be so hard

[Lush]

I thought that in the movie, Arwen was breathtaking. She made my skin crawl. In a good way. While it wasn't true to the book, the fleshing out of her character worked well with the rest of the film. It made it all the more exciting. <BR>As for her role in future movies, I have done some research and found out that she will definitely be present in the next film, but her character won't be "bloothirsty", i.e. she's not likely to do any battle. Works for me. I would post the link here, but silly me forgot where I got the info. I know it was official though. I promise!

While I really enjoyed the movie and thought it was very good, there were certain things which irritated me.<P>I hated Liv Tyler's part and would happily have never set eyes on her again until her proper reappearance at the end of The Return Of The King. The news that she is to have a larger part in the The Two Towers sickens me. I can understand the reasoning behind this expansion of her role but I think that PJ and co are underestimating the power of Tolkien's narrative to compel without the need for romantic Hollywood subplots. <P>The revealing of Aragorn's true destiny so early on also annoyed me. I love the way that Aragorn's path slowly emerges during the course of the trilogy from the shadowy, mistrusted Strider to the true King of Gondor. The movie has already put to rest any doubt about that as we know that, this being Hollywood, there is no doubt that Aragorn is going to fulfil his destiny and evenutally be crowned king of Gondor. Also, the whole sentimental way in which Boromir's death and his final words with Aragorn were presented seems to me to be far from the spirit of the book. There is no final reconciliation between Aragorn and Boromir and this is what gives Boromir's death much of its poignancy. As with Denethor, Boromir's weakness and lack of belief in the power of good adds to the tragedy of his death. In the movie however, Boromir dies almost certain that good will prevail and that Aragorn will be crowned king. <P>Finally Hugo Weaving as Elrond was a gross error in casting. It seemed to me that his interpretation of Elrond must have been taken purely from the script's sypnosis of the character and certainly not from his reading the books. He totally overacted and his presence ruined the whole Rivendell part of the movie for me. <P>There were many other inconsistencies too numerous to mention which I guess are an inevitable part of trying to interpret a dense, detailed literary work for a commercial audience on the big screen. I just wish that PJ had been brave enough to make the truly dark, beautiful and complex film I wanted to see.<P>[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: Fissh, nice fissh ]<p>[ December 30, 2001: Message edited by: Fissh, nice fissh ]

[Maeglin]

I wanted the movie that way also mr. Fish. But I dont have anything against this hole Arwen-thing. If the LOTR-books shall live on new readers must be attracted of them. And if people havnt read the books they most likly wouldnt enjoy the kinda movie you and I would like to see mr. Fish and therefor they wont read the books either and will probably tell their children not to beacause they think it's boring. <P>LONG LIVE TOLKIEN AND ARAGORN KING OF GONDOR!!!!!

[Rose Cotton]

In the first movie I was fine with Arwen's expanded role. But what are they doing even putting her in the second movie? Where would they put her?

[Enkanowen]

they HAD to elaborate the token love story didn't they... i suppose Arwen is going to bring Aragorn his sword in Helm's Deep, or someone said something like that.<BR>I'm not too happy with this but we can only hope she just gets added as in she's around in places where she could have been around in the books but was never mentioned. Or perhaps they are going to takeparts from the appendix and fill it into the second movie. We can only hope...

[zifnab]

Well, I thought that Liv tyler was horrible, thats my 2 cents and Im stickin' to it.

[Eowyn of Ithilien]

I guess the ultimate would be to have two movies-one that sticks exactly to the book, and one for "Hollywood"<BR>But it isn't really feasible and even if it did follow the story there's really a different LOTR for everyone-Ithilien is always unique

Actually Fish I had have to disagree on Boromir's death scene.Some people act like Tolkien was one of the 4 gospel writers.Tolkien wasn't perfect,and like all authors...some things he wrote could have been better. Boromir's death sequence was better done in the movie,and not out of character.The movie Boromir was also more interesting,and more tragic than the book one.<P>That being said, I still like the books better...although I did love the movie.

I wondered why my ears where burning .

[lomion]

Arwen-Warrior princess. Bad call.

[Gayalondiel]

If you don't want to hear a rumour about the next two films, stop NOW...<P><BR>In an interview with Arwen, it has been suggested (or implied, rather) that Arwen slays the lord of the nazgul. I was deeply upset to hear this, as it probably means they've writen eowyn out. I really hope that it isn't true, but it would account for her increased role in the next two films...

[Fenrir]

That isn't true, Eowyn's picture has appeared on the official website and someone high-up has confirmed that the rumour is not true.<BR> <BR>As to Arwen's expanded role, when I first heard about it (the Ford part that is) I was just a little upset that Glorfindel would not be appearing. I thought Peter Jackson sensible enough to keep her role virtually the same as Glorfindel's. I was wrong. He decided to let her face all nine of the nazgul with no other help, utter a horribly cliche line and then send the black riders off on their first swimming lesson for a few thousand years. And I thought it was Eowyn with the death-wish.

[Rhudladion]

I hear ya, Fenrir.<P>That's been my sentiment all along!

[Eol]

When I had seen that part of Arwen, I groaned and plead for the nightmare to end. It was distastful by far. Our culture is obessed with the idea that the only way a person can deminstrate power is by the "sword"( or by fighting physically). What happened to the metal games and wit? Does it not count for anything? <P>The scene with Arwen and Aragon kissing bothered me even worse. Why did they complain not having enough timewhen that scene could have been cut?<P>Here is a different idea to show that they like eachother without adding new scenes. They are at the coucil of Riverdell and they are making eyes at each other. Subtle but effective. Anyways, why would "daddy's" little girl be allowed to hang close and alone with a guy?<P>just a thought.

First of all, I hated Liv Tyler as Arwen. Actually, I think I just hate Live Tyler in general. and I was really looking forward to seeing Glorfindel (SP?) and then she shows up glowing like a freakin' angel that saves the day? Yuck!<P>this is just something I heard from a friend and it could just be a horrible lie to ruin the book for me but she was extremely angry at the whole Arwen/Aragorn thing because apparently Aragorn is promised to another woman somewhere else. and the way he keeps making eyes at Eowyn in the second book...